The NCLAT ruled that reliance on a free certified copy cannot arrest the limitation period, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal for delay beyond the statutory limit under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Principal Bench led by Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Technical Members Mr. Barun Mitra and Mr. Arun Baroka reviewed an appeal and observed that the limitation period for filing an appeal under Section 61 of the IBC begins from the date of the order’s pronouncement, not from the receipt of a free certified copy, and delays beyond the statutory and condonable period cannot be excused, reaffirming that litigant must apply for certified copies promptly to avoid procedural bars.
The NCLAT dismissed an application seeking condonation of an 18-day delay in filing an appeal against an NCLT order dated July 16, 2024, admitting a petition under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The appellant argued that the delay should not be counted from the pronouncement date but from July 23, 2024, when they received a free certified copy of the order. Citing the Supreme Court judgment in State Bank of India v. India Power Corporation Limited, REEDLAW 2024 SC 09608, the appellant claimed that the time taken to receive the free copy should be excluded from the limitation period.
The NCLAT, however, noted that the appellant had not applied for a certified copy, relying only on the free copy issued under Rule 50 of the NCLT Rules, 2016. Referring to the Supreme Court's decisions in V. Nagarajan v. SKS Ispat and Power Limited and Others, REEDLAW 2021 SC 10518 and State Bank of India v. India Power Corporation Limited, REEDLAW 2024 SC 09608, the Appellate Tribunal reiterated that limitation begins from the date of pronouncement, and the appellant must exercise due diligence by applying for a certified copy promptly. The court emphasized that awaiting a free copy cannot arrest the running of the limitation period, as it would disrupt the IBC’s strict timeline framework.
The NCLAT held that the limitation period for filing the appeal had expired on August 15, 2024, and the 18-day delay in filing the appeal exceeded the condonable limit under Section 61(2) of the IBC. As the delay could not be condoned, the tribunal dismissed the delay condonation application, along with the appeal, for lack of jurisdiction.
Mr. Singhal, Advocate represented the Appellant.
Subscribers can access the Case, including Case Analysis, Ratio Decidendi, Headnotes, Briefs, Case Research, Cited Case Laws, Case Law Cross-references, and the latest updates on Statutes, Notifications, Circulars, Guidelines Press Release and more.
Click on the Citation/Link to access these resources
Opmerkingen