<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2023 (10) TMI 897 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444674</link>
    <description>Limitation under Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013 was not defeated by the absence of formal service where the appellants&#039; own subsequent proceedings showed knowledge of the order they later sought to challenge. The appellants had filed connected applications under the same resolution plan and pursued them until disposal, which undermined their plea that limitation had not commenced. On those facts, reliance on certified-copy and limitation principles did not assist them, and no recognised ground for recall was made out. The request for recall was therefore held not maintainable, and the earlier dismissal of the appeals as time-barred was left undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Oct 2023 10:41:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=729717" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (10) TMI 897 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444674</link>
      <description>Limitation under Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013 was not defeated by the absence of formal service where the appellants&#039; own subsequent proceedings showed knowledge of the order they later sought to challenge. The appellants had filed connected applications under the same resolution plan and pursued them until disposal, which undermined their plea that limitation had not commenced. On those facts, reliance on certified-copy and limitation principles did not assist them, and no recognised ground for recall was made out. The request for recall was therefore held not maintainable, and the earlier dismissal of the appeals as time-barred was left undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444674</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>