Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + SCH Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2024 (3) TMI SCH This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (3) TMI 866 - SCH - Insolvency and BankruptcyCondonation of delay of 474 days in filing the Civil Appeals - HELD THAT - Even before the Special Leave Petition was filed, the period of limitation under Section 62 of the IBC had come to an end - There is a delay of 474 days in filing the Civil Appeals, much beyond the period which can be condoned in terms of the provisions of Section 62 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016. There are no reason to entertain the Civil Appeals since they are barred by limitation - Since the appellants seek to withdraw the appeals, the appeals dismissed as withdrawn.
Issues involved: Delay in filing Civil Appeals beyond the condonable period under Section 62 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016.
The Supreme Court noted that the impugned order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal was passed on 28 September 2022. The period of 45 days elapsed on 11 November 2022, and the further condonable period of 15 days on 26 November 2022. Even before the Special Leave Petition was filed, the period of limitation under Section 62 of the IBC had come to an end. The Court observed a delay of 474 days in filing the Civil Appeals, much beyond the period that can be condoned under the provisions of Section 62 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016. Consequently, the Court was not inclined to entertain the Civil Appeals as they were barred by limitation. During the proceedings, Ms. Haripriya Padmanabhan, senior counsel for the appellants, expressed that the appellants wished to withdraw the Civil Appeals to pursue their remedies before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal. On the other hand, Mr. Siddharth Dave, senior counsel for the respondents, objected to granting any liberty to the appellants. Considering the appellants' request to withdraw the appeals, the Court dismissed the appeals as withdrawn. The Court clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the course of action proposed to be followed by the appellants.
|