TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (12) TMI 909
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....C vide Diary No. 20044 on 19.03.2020 being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the Impugned Order dated 13.12.2019 passed by the Learned Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench) in MA 2811/ 2019 in C.P. (IB)- 10(MB)/ 2018. 3. In I.A No. 1590 of 2020 the Applicant had mentioned the fact that the Appellant herein - 'Ketann Anant Raj' filed a Writ Petition (ST) No. 31546 of 2019 before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay Civil Appellate Jurisdiction and order was passed on 20th December, 2019, which is as hereunder:- 1.This petition was placed before us after the urgent mentioning. We allowed the petitioner's advocate to move this matter in our chambers on the last working day only when she stated that she is ready and willing to serve the contesting respondents. 2.Today, the advocate is appearing for respondent No.3 (Liquidator of respondent no.5) and she says that this application is not made bona fide. She says that the petitioner had enough time to bring a proposal of settlement and he is, without showing his bona fides, moving this matter. 3.We called upon the petitioner's advocate to make good atleast 50% of the amount offered by the petit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tant appeal is filed beyond the timelines as prescribed under section 61 of the Code which reads as under: Section 61: Appeals and Appellate Authority: (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained under the Companies Act 2013, any person aggrieved by the order of the Adjudicating Authority under this part may prefer an appeal to the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal. (2) Every appeal under sub-section (1) shall be filed within thirty days before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal: Provided that the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal may allow an appeal to be filed after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal but is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal but such period shall not exceed fifteen days. Hence from the above, it is apparent that there been a considerable delay in filing the Appeal and the Appellants being habitual in abusing the process of law and wasting precious judicial time deserve no reliefs. 5. From the contents of the Present Interlocutory application it transpires that the appellant is seeking exclusion of 89 d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) a plaintiff or an applicant resisting an appeal shall be deemed to be prosecuting a proceeding; (c) misjoinder of parties or of causes of action shall be deemed to be a cause of a like nature with defect of jurisdiction, As seen from the above, before granting any reliefs in terms of section 14 of Limitation Act, 1963, the Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal may be pleased to satisfy itself as to whether he proceedings under the said Writ Petition were been prosecuted by the appellants with due diligence and in good faith. 7. At this juncture, Liquidator/ Respondent No. 1 humbly submits that the Appellants filed the proceeding/ Writ Petition before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court with utmost dishonest intentions which can be demonstrated from more than one reasons mentioned below: (i) Firstly, Appellants were very well aware of their right to prefer an appeal against the impugned order before this Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal under section 61 of the Code, despite the same they wittingly choose to move Hon'ble Bombay High Court with deceitful intentions. The said fact can be corroborated with the letter dated 19.12.2019 issued by the appellant to the Liquidator falsely st....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... approaching this Appellate Tribunal. However, the Appellants deliberately chose to keep the Writ Petition hanging and are now trying to take shelter u/s 14 of Limitation Act. This clearly cannot be said to be a diligent act of the appellant instead it is a sheer portrayal of negligent and reckless attitude. b) Thirdly, it is stated that the Appellants has approached the Bombay High Court for urgent reliefs under the pretext of winter vacations of this Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal. However, it is a matter of fact that the winter vacations of this Hon'ble Tribunal ended on 1st January 2020. As the Bombay High Court vide its order dated 20.12.2019 had also refused to grant any ad interim relief, the Appellants had ample opportunity to prefer an appeal after the winter vacations ended so as to be within the time as prescribed u/s 61 of the Code. However, the appellant chose to sleep on their rights and instead of acting vigilantly preferred to file the appeal belatedly only in the month of March 2020. c) Moreover, the Respondent No.1 is taken by surprise with the fact that, the Appellants in their Application vide para (4) have stated that they continued to pursue the said W....