9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 1245X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... affidavit, the Appellant has mentioned that it had to obtain several documents which could not be procured in time. However, it is not denied that the appeal was filed on 17.04.2023 and then an application was filed on 08.11.2023 for placing on record the additional documents. The Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of National Spot Exchange Limited Vs. Anil Kohli [ 2021 (9) TMI 1156 - SUPREME COURT ] held that the delay beyond the period of 15 days cannot be condoned by the Tribunal and even under Article 142 of the Constitution of India which makes the provision very stringent and lays responsibility on the Appellant to be vigilant enough to file the appeal within the prescribed period. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, there are no merit in the application and the same is hereby dismissed - The application for seeking condonation of delay in re-filing has become infructuous and the same is hereby dismissed. Condonation of delay of 15 days in filing the appeal and for condonation of delay of 162 in refiling the appeal - HELD THAT:- In the present case, the appeal has been filed on the last date i.e. 15th day i.e. 45th day. The reason given in para 3 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounsel requested the Appellant for copies of several documents including Handling agreement dated 15.12.2018, Bill of Lading, Authorization letter contained in the Tripartite Agreement, Resolution plan, CoC resolution accepting resolution plan etc. The said documents were necessary to showcase that the goods belong to the Corporate Debtor, which is the main issue involved in the instant matter. 9. However, the Appellant, being the Chairman of the Monitoring Committee, faced immense difficulty in procuring the documents as the same were not in custody of the Appellant. The Appellant put constant efforts to procure the said documents for the Counsel in order to re-file the matter within time, however, some of the documents could not be procured, which also occasioned the delay in refiling. 10. As of today also, the Appellant has not been able to procure several documents including Bill of Lading, Authorization letter contained in the Tripartite Agreement and several other documents mentioned in the Tripartite Agreement. The documents which were successfully procured by the Appellant have been filed in an application for Additional Documents. 3. On the other hand, Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dditional affidavit, the Appellant has mentioned that it had to obtain several documents which could not be procured in time. However, it is not denied that the appeal was filed on 17.04.2023 and then an application was filed on 08.11.2023 for placing on record the additional documents. Thus, the question would arise if the documents can be filed as additional evidence through an application, then why the appeal could not be filed within the prescribed time. It has been held by the Hon ble Supreme Court that the sufficient cause should be an explanation and not an excuse whereas in the present case, the explanation given in the additional affidavit is only an excuse otherwise period of 30 days is provided to all for challenging the order of the Adjudicating Authority and only a window of 15 days is kept open for filing the appeal alongwith an application for condonation of delay but the explanation has to be a sufficient cause that too to the satisfaction of the Appellate Authority, which in our considered opinion is miserably missing in the present case and therefore, we could not persuade ourselves to condone the delay of 15 days for filing the appeal. Even otherwise, the Hon ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... agreement dated 15.12.2018, Bill of Lading, Authorization letter contained in the Tripartite Agreement, Resolution plan, CoC resolution accepting resolution plan etc. The said documents were necessary to showcase that the goods belong to the Corporate Debtor, which is the main issue involved in the instant matter. 9. However, the Appellant, being the Chairman of the Monitoring Committee, faced immense difficulty in procuring the documents as the same were not in custody of the Appellant. The Appellant put constant efforts to procure the said documents for the Counsel in order to re-file the matter within time, however, some of the documents could not be procured, which also occasioned the delay in refiling. 10. As of today also, the Appellant has not been able to procure several documents including Bill of Lading, Authorization letter contained in the Tripartite Agreement and several other documents mentioned in the Tripartite Agreement. The documents which were successfully procured by the Appellant have been filed in an application for Additional Documents. 3. On the other hand, Counsel for the Respondent has submitted that the appeal was filed on 17.04.2023 an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ral documents which could not be procured in time. However, it is not denied that the appeal was filed on 17.04.2023 and then an application was filed on 08.11.2023 for placing on record the additional documents. Thus, the question would arise if the documents can be filed as additional evidence through an application, then why the appeal could not be filed within the prescribed time. It has been held by the Hon ble Supreme Court that the sufficient cause should be an explanation and not an excuse whereas in the present case, the explanation given in the additional affidavit is only an excuse otherwise period of 30 days is provided to all for challenging the order of the Adjudicating Authority and only a window of 15 days is kept open for filing the appeal alongwith an application for condonation of delay but the explanation has to be a sufficient cause that too to the satisfaction of the Appellate Authority, which in our considered opinion is miserably missing in the present case and therefore, we could not persuade ourselves to condone the delay of 15 days for filing the appeal. Even otherwise, the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of National Spot Exchange Limited Vs. Anil Kohli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the Tripartite Agreement, Resolution plan, CoC resolution accepting resolution plan etc. The said documents were necessary to showcase that the goods belong to the Corporate Debtor, which is the main issue involved in the instant matter. 9. However, the Appellant, being the Chairman of the Monitoring Committee, faced immense difficulty in procuring the documents as the same were not in custody of the Appellant. The Appellant put constant efforts to procure the said documents for the Counsel in order to re-file the matter within time, however, some of the documents could not be procured, which also occasioned the delay in refiling. 10. As of today also, the Appellant has not been able to procure several documents including Bill of Lading, Authorization letter contained in the Tripartite Agreement and several other documents mentioned in the Tripartite Agreement. The documents which were successfully procured by the Appellant have been filed in an application for Additional Documents. 3. On the other hand, Counsel for the Respondent has submitted that the appeal was filed on 17.04.2023 and thereafter another application was filed by the Appellant for additional ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appeal was filed on 17.04.2023 and then an application was filed on 08.11.2023 for placing on record the additional documents. Thus, the question would arise if the documents can be filed as additional evidence through an application, then why the appeal could not be filed within the prescribed time. It has been held by the Hon ble Supreme Court that the sufficient cause should be an explanation and not an excuse whereas in the present case, the explanation given in the additional affidavit is only an excuse otherwise period of 30 days is provided to all for challenging the order of the Adjudicating Authority and only a window of 15 days is kept open for filing the appeal alongwith an application for condonation of delay but the explanation has to be a sufficient cause that too to the satisfaction of the Appellate Authority, which in our considered opinion is miserably missing in the present case and therefore, we could not persuade ourselves to condone the delay of 15 days for filing the appeal. Even otherwise, the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of National Spot Exchange Limited Vs. Anil Kohli, Civil Appeal No. 6187 of 2019 held that the delay beyond the period of 15 days ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
