9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (5) TMI 941 - HC - Companies LawDelay in filing of appeal by 142 days - Condonation of delay as per Section 10-F of the Companies Act, 1956 - An application under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, seeking condonation of delay of 142 days - Held that - The maximum period upto which an appeal can be filed in the Court even if filed late, is 120 days (i.e. 60 60 days). This Court cannot condone the delay beyond the period of 60 days. Even the plea raised by the appellant that earlier on account of ill advise, a writ petition was filed, hence, taking support of Section 14 of the Limitation Act the delay is to be condoned, but such a plea is not available to the appellant as Section 14 of the Limitation Act has no application in appeals. While considering the judgment of Hon ble the Supreme Court in Popular Construction Co. s case 2001 (10) TMI 1044 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA and subsequent judgment in Gopal Sardar vs Karuna Sardar 2004 (3) TMI 743 - SUPREME COURT , this Court in Pawan Goel s case 2008 (2) TMI 626 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA , opined that the maximum period available to the appellant for preferring appeal to this Court is sixty sixty days i.e. 120 days, subject to the condition that the appellant has shown sufficient cause for condonation up to sixty days beyond the prescribed period of sixty days and the provisions of Sections 4 to 24 of the Limitation Act have no application.The issue was thereafter considered by Hon ble the Supreme Court in Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board s case 2010 (4) TMI 1031 - SUPREME COURT . Similar view was expressed by Division Bench of Delhi High Court in Delhi Development Authority vs M/s Durga Construction Company 2013 (11) TMI 1527 - DELHI HIGH COURT decided on 7.11.2013. What can be summed up from the aforesaid authoritative enunciation of law on the issue by Hon ble the Supreme Court and different High Courts is that where certain period has been specified in the special Act limiting powers of the Court to condone the delay, the same would amount express exclusion of Section 5 of the Limitation Act within the meaning of Section 29 (2) of the Limitation Act. - Decided against the appellant.
Issues Involved:
1. Maintainability of the appeal due to delay in filing. 2. Application of Section 14 of the Limitation Act in appeals. 3. Interpretation of Section 10-F of the Companies Act, 1956 regarding the condonation of delay. Detailed Analysis: 1. Maintainability of the Appeal Due to Delay in Filing: The primary issue addressed was whether the appeal, filed with a delay of 142 days, could be entertained. Section 10-F of the Companies Act, 1956, provides a period of 60 days for filing an appeal, with an additional 60 days for which the delay could be condoned if sufficient cause is shown. The court emphasized that the maximum period for filing an appeal, including the condonable delay, is 120 days. Since the appeal was filed beyond this period, it was deemed time-barred. The court cited several precedents, including the Supreme Court's judgment in *Union of India vs Popular Construction Co.*, which highlighted that the phrase "but not thereafter" in the statute amounts to an express exclusion of the court's power to condone delays beyond the specified period. 2. Application of Section 14 of the Limitation Act in Appeals: The appellant argued that the delay should be condoned under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, as they initially filed a writ petition based on incorrect legal advice. However, the court clarified that Section 14 of the Limitation Act, which allows for the exclusion of time spent in prosecuting a different proceeding, does not apply to appeals. This position was supported by previous judgments, including *Pawan Goel vs KMG Milk Food Limited*, where it was held that the provisions of Sections 4 to 24 of the Limitation Act, including Section 14, do not apply to appeals under special statutes like the Companies Act. 3. Interpretation of Section 10-F of the Companies Act, 1956: Section 10-F of the Companies Act, 1956, was scrutinized to determine the court's power to condone delays. The section explicitly limits the condonable delay to a maximum of 60 days beyond the initial 60 days period for filing an appeal. The court referenced multiple judgments, including *Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board vs Central Electricity Regulatory Commission*, which upheld that special statutes with specific limitation periods exclude the application of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The court concluded that the Companies Act, being a special statute, expressly excludes the application of Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning delays beyond the period specified in Section 10-F. Conclusion: The appeal was dismissed due to being filed beyond the permissible period of 120 days. The court held that it lacked the jurisdiction to condone the delay beyond the statutory limit set by Section 10-F of the Companies Act, 1956. The application of Section 14 of the Limitation Act was also rejected as it does not apply to appeals under special statutes. The judgment reinforced the principle that specific limitation periods in special statutes are strictly adhered to, and the courts cannot extend these periods beyond what is expressly provided.
|
