2026 (3) TMI 308

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ubramanian, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. VVSN Raju, Advocate for R1 Mr. Krishnendu Datta, Senior Advocate for Mr. Palash Taing, Mr. Mayank Kumar & Ms. Alina Merin Matthew, Advocates for R-2. ORDER [Oral Judgment: Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, Member (Judicial)] These are two company appeals preferred under Section 61 of the I & B Code, 2016. Company Appeal CA(AT)(CH) No. 106/2025 has been preferred being aggrieved against the impugned order of 18.06.2024 as it was rendered in IA No. 10/2024 in CP (IB) No. 296/7/HDB/2022. Company Appeal CA (AT) (CH) No. 107/2025 has been preferred, challenging the impugned order of the 18.06.2024 as it was rendered in IA No. 765/2024, in the same company petition i.e., CP(IB)No.296/7/HDB/....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Hon'ble Apex Court on appeal. 4. Hence, we proceed to consider the instant Condone Delay Applications on the same premises as it was done for the earlier Appeals which were decided by the judgment of this Appellate Tribunal dated 28.04.2025, and the reasons, which were assigned in the case of CA(INS) No.131 & 133/2025, will be taken as to be the reason for the purposes of considering the instant Condone Delay Applications. 5. This time the Appellant has added one more ground to support his claim, which was not there before this Tribunal in the earlier Appeals, which is that apart from the fact that the records of the company petition went missing and could be traced only in February, 2025, certain documents essential for adjudication....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i Commercial Private Limited versus Reserve Bank of India has taken a view that delay in refiling, if it is inordinate, it has to be reasonably explained to the satisfaction of the Tribunal and it should not be condoned in a routine manner without testing the reasonability of the delay. Relevant para is extracted hereunder: - "8. The Learned Counsel for the Respondent submitted that the reasons adduced by the Appellant to explain the delay in refiling are perfunctory, casual and vague, imputing lack of bona-fide on the part of the Appellant, it was submitted that they did not provide details of how their functioning was so adversely affected by Covid pandemic that they needed such an inordinately long time in rectifying the filing ....