2023 (7) TMI 833

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mpany Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 347 of 2021. Also 'Heard', Mr. PV. Vinod, the Learned Counsel appearing for the 'Respondent'/ 'Resolution Professional'. According to the 'Petitioner'/ 'Appellant', the 'Petitioner'/ 'Appellant', is not a party to the 'Application', filed by the 'Respondent', before the 'Adjudicating Authority'/ 'National Company Law Tribunal, Kochi Bench', and as such, is not in possession of 'Certified Copy', of the 'Impugned Order', dated 29/01/2023, made in IA/224/KOB/2020, in IBA/49/KOB/2019. The Learned representing Counsel for the 'Petitioner'/ 'Appellant', points out that there has occasioned a delay of '290 days', in preferring the instant Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 347 of 2021, in respect of the 'I....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ut that the 'Petitioner'/ 'Appellant', had admitted that it had not filed any 'Application', for obtaining a 'Certified Copy' of the 'Impugned Order', and without filing of the 'Certified Copy' of the 'Impugned Order', in terms of Rule 22 of 'National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules', the instant 'Appeal', filed by the 'Petitioner'/ 'Appellant', is per se, not maintainable, in the eye of 'Law'. The Learned Counsel for the 'Respondent'/ 'Resolution Professional', refers to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 3327 of 2020, in the matter of V. Nagarajan Vs. SKS Ispat and Power Limited (LL 2021 SC, 581), where in, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, had observed at Paragraph 22, as observed and held as under: P....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al is beyond 15 days after expiring of the limitation, we are unable to condone the delay in filing the Appeal. In result, IA No. 3349 of 2022, is dismissed. Consequently, the Memo of Appeal stands rejected." Furthermore, in the 'Order' of this 'Tribunal, dated 26/08/2022, in IA No. 2431 of 2021, in C.A. (AT) (Ins) No. 877 of 2022, between 44 Noida Infratech (Two) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Enforcement Directorate Kolkata Zone Office & Office & Ors., wherein, at Paragraph 13, it is mentioned as under: Para 13: "In the present case, the Appeal could have been filed within limitation till 06th June, 2022 and this Tribunal could have condoned onlty 15 days delay. The Appeal having been filed on 04th July, 2022 and delay being beyond 15 days is ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t precisely, the 'Delay' that requires to be explained, is from the 'date', the 'time was running out', till the date of preferring of an 'Appeal', or a 'Petition', as per decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Ramlal Vs. Rewa Coal Fields Limited, AIR 1962, SC 361. To be noted that Section 61(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, envisages filing of an 'Appeal', by an 'Aggrieved Party', within '30 days', from the date of 'Pronouncement Order', (vide Section 61(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016) and the 'Appellate Tribunal', if sufficient Cause, is exhibited on the side of the 'Petitioner'/ 'Appellant', in not preferring the 'Appeal', within '30 days' (as per Section 61(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Cod....