Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (12) TMI 474

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of 2024 & I. A. No. 6057, 6155 of 2024 - -
Insolvency & Bankruptcy
[ Justice Ashok Bhushan ] Chairperson , [ Barun Mitra ] Member ( Technical ) And [ Arun Baroka ] Member ( Technical ) For the Appellant : Ms. Uttara Babbar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Manan Bansal, Mr. Rayana Mukherjee, Advocates For the Respondent : Mr. Rishav Banerjee, Mr. Saikat Sarkar, Ms. Prerna Shaha, Advocates with Mr. Vaibhav Khandelwal, Liquidator in person ORDER ( Hybrid Mode ) Per: Barun Mitra, Member (Technical) I.A. No. 5382 of 2024 is an application filed by the Appellant praying for condonation of 121 days' delay in refiling of Company Appeal (AT)(Ins) No. 1524 of 2024. 2. Notice was issued in respect of the above IAs 5382 and 5524 of 2024 by thi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ant. In their reply affidavit, the Respondent has opposed the grounds of condonation cited by the Applicant by holding them as untenable, false, vague and unsubstantiated. It was also pressed by the Learned Counsel for the Respondent that the Applicant was all along negligent and lax in curing the defects in their appeal and had catapulted into action only after a notice of contempt was sent to them on 30.06.2024. Refuting the tenability of explanation offered by the Applicant in justification of refiling delay, the Respondent submitted that not only was the span of delay in refiling inordinately long but the grounds cited were implausible. Elaborating further it was pointed out that the ground relied upon by the Applicant of bad health of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... or the same defects which had added to confusion and complications in tracking the defects and curing them. To cap it all, the clerk of the filing counsel was not keeping good health which substantially delayed the curing of the defects. Moreover, since this was the first case which was filed by the counsel through the medium of e-filing portal and the counsel not being familiar with the filing process on the e-portal, he had failed to keep proper record of the defects and its removal. Another reason that was pleaded for causing delay was that there was the intervening period of summer vacations from 03.06.2024 to 30.06.2024. It was also vehemently contended that most of the defects were cured in the months of April and May 2024 and hence t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... umstances. We would now like to examine whether the present Applicant has been able to adduce cogent grounds to satisfy us that there were circumstances beyond their control which led to the delay in clearing the defects. When we look at the history of filing, we find that the Appeal along with application seeking condonation of delay was filed in March, 2024 and defects were intimated soon thereafter by the Registry in the same month. Since the time of intimation of defects, the Applicant has taken four months to remedy the defects. One of the principal explanations attributed for the delay by the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant was that there were five inter-connected appeals with each of them having multiple applications and hence the defe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ns in other courts, if he was sufficiently diligent, he could have displayed similar level of alacrity in dealing with defects in the present set of appeals filed before this Tribunal to render them defect-free. It becomes clear that the Applicant was actively litigating before other judicial forum while being clearly negligent in following-up the present matter before the Tribunal. This is indicative of negligence and inaction on the part of the Applicant. We therefore do not find that sufficient cause has been made out which would warrant overlooking the delay caused in curing the defects on the grounds of ill-health of the clerk. 10. This brings us to some of the other grounds cited to explain the delay in rectifying the defects. One su .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as clearly failed to indicate any circumstance beyond his control which warranted 121 days to clear the defects. This renders all their explanations for delay to be bald and facile. Since the time of intimation of defects, the Applicant was prevaricating over the defects for nearly four months. No credible, genuine endeavours were made by the Applicant to correct the defects. This shows that the Applicant was casual, callous, careless and negligent in refiling the appeal on time and such inaction or dereliction cannot be countenanced. We are of the view that the Applicant cannot be shown indulgence keeping in view that the IBC proceedings have stringent timelines to be followed and the adjudicatory proceedings have to be completed in a prom .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates