Delay in re-filing requires strict proof of sufficient cause; generic defect-cure explanations did not justify condonation.

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Delay in re-filing a company appeal was not condoned because the appellant failed to show sufficient cause or due diligence in curing defects. The NCLAT held that, especially in insolvency matters, re-filing delays must be assessed strictly in light of the Code's time-bound framework, and generic explanations such as re-pagination, paper-book restructuring, rescanning, and internal record retrieval are inadequate without material particulars. Here, no defect sheet, specific Registry objections, or date-wise chronology of corrective steps was produced, and the claim that records were in Mumbai was treated as a bare logistical inconvenience. The application for condonation was rejected, and the appeal was consequently rejected.....