2026 (8) TMI 1142

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e proceedings under Section 7 of I&B Code which was drawn as against the respondent/corporate debtor. Those proceedings were registered before NCLT as CP(IB) 2689/ND/2019. Owing to the absence of the learned Counsel of the appellant, the company petition was dismissed for want of prosecution by an Order that, was passed on 17.03.2025. 2. Seeking its recall, a restoration application was preferred by the appellant by filing the same before the Registry on 15.09.2025 contending thereof that, the reasons for non-appearance on the date, has been that, since a wrong timing had been noted of sitting of the Bench and because of the fact that, the matter was shown to be listed before the Bench at 02.30 p.m. but, however, on 17.03.2025, the Bench....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cation, being preferred on 03.10.2025, the same was preferred along with a delay condonation application, which was duly supported with an affidavit accompanied by a separate Court fees. But, however, on the date fixed, the recall application was listed, but the supporting delay condonation application, despite the same being filed along with the recall application, was not registered and resultantly was not listed before the learned Tribunal, when the Order of 09.10.2025 was passed. Consequently, the learned Tribunal has rejected the restoration application by an order of 09.10.2025. 6. So far as the aspect pertaining to the limitation is concerned, for the purposes of preferring of a recall application in the light of the provisions co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n thirty days from the date of dismissal and satisfies the Tribunal that there was sufficient cause for his non-appearance when the petition or the application was called for hearing, the Tribunal shall make an order restoring the same: Provided that where the case was disposed of on merits the decision shall not be re-opened." 7. Here, in the instant case, the appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution on 17.03.2025 owing to certain misunderstanding that prevailed with the Counsel for which the appellant cannot be made to suffer, because of the Counsel's mistake. The aforesaid fact was bonafidely expressed in the application due to preponing of the sitting of the Tribunal due to, which the Counsel was unable to coordinate to ....