9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (2) TMI 1502 - HC - Companies LawCondonation of delay in filing the present appeal beyond the period of 60 days as provided under section 10F of the Companies Act 1956 - HELD THAT - There is a merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents that the dates relied upon by the appellant are not reliable. In fact in the application for condonation of delay the appellant himself states that copy of the impugned order dated 12.08.2014 was received by him on or before 25.08.2014. In case copy of the order was received after 25.08.2014 the delay in filing the appeal would not be condonable. The grounds stated for seeking condonation of delay inspire no confidence. As per the application it is claimed that appellant being the brother-in-law tried to resolve the matter out of court. It is pleaded that settlement talks between the parties ultimately failed due to the greed of respondent No.2 and hence the appellant could not file the appeal within the statutory period. Hence condonation of delay is sought. As noted the grounds so stated inspire no confidence and the delay cannot be condoned on the said grounds. There is a merit in the contention of the respondents that the present appeal has been filed against the order by which the review petition filed by the appellants against the order dated 30.04.2014 was dismissed. The appellant herein seeks to also assail the original order dated 30.04.2014. Keeping in view the above conduct of the appellant and the legal position in my opinion no grounds are made out to condone the delay in filing the application.
Issues involved:
Condonation of delay in filing an appeal under section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956. Detailed Analysis: 1. Delay in filing the appeal: The appellant sought condonation of delay in filing the appeal beyond the statutory period of 60 days as per section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956. The appellant claimed that the delay was due to ongoing settlement talks between the parties, which ultimately failed. However, the respondent argued that the appeal was filed after the expiry of 120 days from the date of the original order, making it time-barred. 2. Legal provisions and judgments: The court referred to section 10F of the Companies Act, which allows appeals within 60 days from the date of communication of the order, with a provision for condonation of delay up to an additional 60 days on showing sufficient cause. Citing the judgment of the Supreme Court in Municipal Corporation of Delhi vs. Yaswant Singh Negi, the court emphasized that the limitation period for filing an appeal cannot exceed 120 days. 3. Exclusion of Limitation Act: The court highlighted the exclusion of Sections 4 to 24 of the Limitation Act in cases governed by section 10F of the Companies Act. It reiterated that the maximum period for filing an appeal under section 10F is 120 days, subject to showing sufficient cause for condonation of delay. 4. Merger of orders: The court discussed different scenarios regarding review petitions and emphasized that the dismissal of a review petition does not alter the original decree or order. It clarified that parties must challenge the original decree within the stipulated time, not the order dismissing the review petition. 5. Decision and dismissal: Considering the legal provisions, judgments, and conduct of the appellant, the court found no grounds to condone the delay in filing the appeal. Consequently, the application seeking condonation of delay was dismissed, leading to the dismissal of the appeal itself. In conclusion, the court's detailed analysis of the legal provisions, relevant judgments, and the specific circumstances of the case led to the dismissal of the application seeking condonation of delay and the subsequent dismissal of the appeal under section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956.
|
