2022 (7) TMI 1354

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ustice Rakesh Kumar Jain] Member (Judicial), [Mr. Kanthi Narahari] Member (Technical) and [Dr. Alok Srivastava] Member (Technical) For the Appellant: Ms. Meenakshi Rawat, Mr. Rajesh Chhetri and Mr. Mukund Cherkuri, Advocates For the Respondent: Mr. Aditya Vashisth, Mr. Gaurav Mitra, Advocates, Ms Punthi Shah, IahraLokhandwala, Advocates ORDER This appeal is purported to have been filed....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ause the delay has been caused, firstly, the Appellants were not a party to the lis before the Adjudicating Authority and secondly, they came to know about the order dated 12.12.2019 only on 02.01.2020 when they noticed the same on the website of the Adjudicating Authority. It is submitted that the certified copy of the impugned order dated 12.12.2019 was applied on 31.01.2020 and thus a delay ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vident Fund Commissioner & Anr. Civil Appeal No. 2212 of 2021 decided on 29.04.2022. We have heard Counsel for the parties on the application for condonation of delay. Section 61 of the Code provides appeals to the Appellate Authority much less the NCLAT against the order of the Adjudicating Authority. Section 61(2) provides limitation of 30 days to file the appeal. The proviso to section 61....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion is as to whether the limitation is to be counted from the date of passing of the order or from the date of the knowledge of the party. In this regard, the issue is no more res-integra, in view of the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V Nagarajan (Supra) and Safire Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Supra). Counsel for the Appellant has failed to cite any judgment to the contrary ....