2000 (8) TMI 981

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....olding that the petitioner's appeal was filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation. The learned counsel for contesting respondents submitted that AAIFR's conclusions are on terra firma. Therefore the only question that needs adjudication is whether the view of the AAIFR was correct. 3. For resolution of the controversy the factual position, which is almost undisputed needs to be noted in brief. The Board of Industrial and Financial Reconstruction ('BIFR') passed an order dated 3-4-1997 in respect of a petition filed by GTC Industries Ltd. under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 ('Act'). Petitioner was not a party before the BIFR. It filed an appeal No. 10 of 1999 on 19-11-1998. AAIFR held that while comput....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng point of limitation. 5. In order to appreciate rival submissions section 25 needs to be noted. Same reads as follows : "Appeal - (1) Any person aggrieved by an order of the Board made under this Act may, within forty-five days from the date on which a copy of the order is issued to him, prefer an appeal to the Appellate Authority : Provided that the Appellate Authority may entertain any appeal after the said period of forty-five days but not after sixty days from the date aforesaid if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time. (2) On receipt of an appeal under sub-section (1), the Appellate Authority may, after giving an opportunity to the appellant to be heard, if he so desir....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cer of the Board duly empowered by the Secretary in this behalf. Obviously the order has to be issued by the Board and the manner in which it is to be authenticated is laid down in clause (2) of regulation 15. The learned counsel for respondent no. 3 submitted that word used is 'issued' and not 'served' and the person who shall issue is not specifically provided and knowledge from any source other than BIFR would suffice. We do not find any substance in said stand scheme of the Statute makes it clear that issuance of the order is an act to be undertaken by BIFR. For the purpose of computation of period of limitation, date of service has to be the effective date. Otherwise a person would be rendered remediless if the order is served after fo....