AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
The proceedings by way of IA No. 2 / 2021, as it was preferred in CP (IB) No. 698 / 10 / HDB / 2018, under Section 30 (6) of the I & B Code, 2016, to be read with Regulation 39(4) of the IBBI Regulations had ultimately culminated into an Order dated 12.08.2021 approving of the Resolution Plan, as submitted by the Resolution Professional in this case. It is this Impugned Order, which is under challenge in the instant Appeal.
The Appellant had e-filed the Appeal on 25.04.2022. The Appeal thus filed was scrutinised by the Registry on 05.02.2022 and the intimation of the defects was parted to the Appellant on 25.04.2022. But, despite the intimation of the defects as early as 25.04.2022, the Appeal was Re-filed by the Appellant, only on 11.02.2024, after a delay of 644 days.
Further, the Registry has reported that the delay in filing the Appeal in terms of the provisions of limitation prescribed under Section 61 of the I & B Code, 2016, is that of 218 days and even after excluding the grace period, granted on account of Covid-19 situation, the delay amounts to 89 days, which is beyond the scope of Proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 61 of the I & B Code, 2016.
The instant Company Appeal accompanies Condone Delay Application No. 454 / 2022, seeking Condonation of 644 days of delay, which has chanced in Re-filing of the Appeal.
On the perusal of the Application and the affidavit itself, in support thereto, it does not give any plausible reason for condonation of 644 days of delay which has chanced in Re-filing of the Appeal. Though, the delay which had chanced in Re-filing is an issue between the Appellant and the Court, but still, this Tribunal cannot be oblivious of the fact that a Litigant has to be diligent in pursuing of his legal rights to resort through the recourses available to him under Law, as against the Order rendered by a Court.
In the present case since the intimation of the defects was already imparted to the Appellant, as back as on 25.04.2022 and the Re-filing was made on 11.02.2024, with a delay of 644 days and since this delay in Re-filing has not been reasonably explained, the IA No. 454 / 2024, would stand rejected.
As far as IA No. 453 / 2024 is concerned, the Appellant invokes the provisions of Section 61 (2) of the I & B Code, 2016, for seeking Condonation of delay of 89 days, the reason attributed for the same being on the ground of the prevalent Covid seeking the condonation of delay is on the ground of the prevalent Covid-19 situation. But, the said Covid-19 situation has already been taken into consideration, and the benefit of the same has been extended by the Registry and even after excluding that period, the delay which has chanced comes to 89 days. Even this Application i.e. IA No. 454 / 2024, does not provide any plausible reason for this delay.
Owing to the fact that the delay which has chanced being that of 89 days, is beyond the ambit of the Proviso to sub-section 2 of Section 61 of the I & B Code, 2016, this `Tribunal’, cannot condone the delay, which has chanced beyond the permissible 15 days of delay, after excluding the Period of Limitation, prescribed for preferring an Appeal i.e. 30 days. Thus, even IA No. 453 / 2024 lacks merit and the same is dismissed.
As a consequence of rejection of the aforesaid Condonation Delay Applications, the consequential effect of the same, would be that the Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 171 / 2024 would stand dismissed. The other connected pending Interlocutory Applications, as a consequence would stand closed.