9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 746X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... udicial): 1. The instant Appeal has been filed by the Appellant, being the Secured Financial Creditor, seeking to challenge the Impugned Order dated 29.07.2024, passed in IA No. 1378 / 2024 in CP No. 278 / 2018 by the learned NCLT, Hyderabad, by virtue of which, he has been directed to tender an amount of Rs.96.28 Crores (estimated surplus amount) to the Liquidation Account and to reimburse the costs amounting to Rs.90,70,048/- incurred for protection and preservation of the fixed assets belonging to the Liquidation Estate. 2. Brief facts of the case are given below: The Corporate Debtor M/s. B.S. Limited was admitted into CIRP proceedings, on an application under Section 7 of I & B Code, 2016, moved by State Bank of India, by the Order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h the following directions: "In light of the above observations and discussion of the law, this Authority issues the following directions: i. M/s. Omkara Assets Reconstruction Private Limited and Bank of India, as first charge holders, are directed to tender the surplus amount of Rs.96.28 crores to the Liquidation Account. ii. The Liquidator is authorized to distribute the surplus amount among the secured financial creditors in proportion to their admitted claims, as detailed in paragraph 12 of the application. iii. M/s. Omkara Assets Reconstruction Private Limited and Bank of India are directed to reimburse costs amounting to Rs.90,70,048/- incurred for the protection and preservation of the Fixed Assets to the Liquidation Estate." ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... limitation period should be reckoned from such date only and as he has filed the Appeal on 14.09.2024 i.e. well within the outer limit of 45 days prescribed under Section 61(2) of the Code, the delay deserves to be condoned and merely because he has not applied for the Certified copy within the period of limitation may not be taken as to be a ground for rejecting his Condone Delay Application i.e. IA No. 1012 / 2024. 8. He submits that, as the scope is left wide open under Section 61, for any aggrieved party to initiate a proceedings under Section 61 by way of an Appeal and as exemption from production of Certified copy of the order is contemplated under Rule 31 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016, applying for the Certified copy within the prescribe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fied copy is not applied within the prescribed period of limitation to be computed from the date of the Judgment. 11. He submits that in the light of the Judgment of the Principal Bench as reported in 2024 SCC OnLine NCLAT 383 - Deepak Dahyalal V. Steel Resources & Anr., aforesaid proposition stands established. The factual backdrop in the aforesaid case is contained in Para 2, which is extracted hereunder: "2. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that since the Adjudicating Authority had passed ex-parte order in the main company petition CP-IB/277(MB)/2023 on 27.06.2023, the Appellant had no knowledge of the proceedings. The Appellant became aware of the proceedings only when the interim resolution professional informed the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter factoring in one day of public holiday on account of 26th January. Admitting that the appeal was filed on 01.02.2024, it was claimed that it meant effectively only 16 days delay beyond the permitted 30 days limitation time. In sum it was pointed out that keeping in view the ill health of the Appellant and bereavement in the family coupled with intervening holiday/vacations, the delay deserves to be condoned." 12. The Counsel for the Respondent submits that the inference drawn in Para 16 & 21 of the said Judgment has to be taken into consideration from the perspective that knowledge itself may not be taken as a reason for condonation of delay. 13. Having meticulously scrutinized the factual backdrop, it is seen that admittedly here, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay be fatal enough to deny condonation of delay and that too, in the circumstances of the instant case, where the Appeal has been preferred on 14.09.2024 i.e., it was beyond the upper 45 days of time period prescribed under the proviso to Sub Section 2 of Section 61 of the I & B Code, 2016, if computed from the date of pronouncement of the Judgment. 15. Apart from it, if the controversy is taken into consideration with regards to the perspective of knowledge, we had an occasion to deal with a similar situation, where the implication of knowledge was considered by this Tribunal in a Judgment rendered in IA No. 361 / 2021 in Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 177 / 2021 in the matters of Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
