AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
Oral Judgment : Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, Member (Judicial):
The appellant herein in this Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 367 / 2024 has put a challenge to the Impugned Judgment dated 23.08.2024, as it has been rendered in a proceeding, which has been held under Section 42 of the I & B Code, 2016, in which, the prayer made by the applicant for condonation of 1094 days of delay in filing the Interlocutory Application, challenging the rejection of its claim by the Liquidator / Respondent was rejected. It is interesting to note that the claim of the appellant, stood rejected by the Liquidator/Respondent as back as on 19.01.2021.
The learned AAG(V) who appears on behalf of the appellant submits that, he would be falling well within the ambit of Judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court as rendered in Suo Motu Writ Petition No. 3 / 2020 wherein, owing to the Covid-19 situation, which prevailed in the Country, Hon’ble Apex Court extended the period of limitation for all judicial proceedings from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022, and hence, his prayer for condonation of delay in filing the application should have been granted by Hon’ble NCLT.
The Appellant, in the IA (IBC) No. 366 (CHE) / 2024, had preferred an application for setting aside the Order of 19.01.2021 as it was passed by the respondent/liquidator rejecting the claim of the applicant/appellant and for directing the respondent to revive and consider all the documents relating to the claim filed by the applicant.
Except for the argument as above, extended by the learned AAG(V) appearing for the appellant, in respect of the implications of the Covid-19 situation, there is no other logical ground, which has been either pleaded or argued by the learned AAG(V) for the appellant, for the purposes of explaining delay of 1094 days, in invoking the proceedings under Section 42 of I & B Code, 2016.
The aforesaid aspect pertaining to the implications of Covid-19 situation and whether it would at all affect the proceedings under Section 42 of I & B Code, 2016, has been quite elaborately dealt in the Impugned Judgment in Para 6 & 7 and thereafter, a detailed scrutiny about the factual aspect as it pertains thereto, has also been elaborately done by the learned Adjudicating Authority.
The learned Adjudicating Authority has observed that, the liquidation of the Corporate Debtor, stood initiated as back as on 09.11.2018 and consequent to the same, the notice was issued, inviting claims as back as on 14.11.2018 and the last date for submission of such claims was fixed on 13.12.2018. The appellant submitted his claim only on 22.12.2020, two years after the last date and it stood rejected by the Liquidator as time barred, under Regulation 12(2)(b) of IBBI (Liquidation Process) Regulations as back as on 19.01.2021.
The concession granted by Hon’ble Apex Court in the form of extensions of limitation period because of Covid-19 period, ended on 28.02.2022. However, the appellant has preferred an application under Section 42 against the order of liquidation before NCLT, Chennai only on 18.01.2024 i.e. after a delay of 1094 days. Having considered the said aspect and the implications of the various authorities and judicial precedents as relied by the learned Adjudicating Authority, pertaining to the principles of limitation and the implications of the time-bound process to be adopted for the purposes of the proceedings to be carried under the I & B Code, 2016, the learned Adjudicating Authority dismissed the application preferred under Section 42 on the ground that it was barred by limitation, and more particularly because the entire process under the I & B Code, 2016, has to strictly governed by the time lines prescribed under the Code.
After having heard the learned AAG(V) for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent and after going through the findings, which has been recorded in Para 10 of the Impugned Judgment it can only be deduced that after the rejection of claim as back as on 19.01.2021, the appellant has to blame himself for having taken 3 years (1094 days) to invoke the provisions of Section 42 of the Code.
The argument with regards to the Covid-19 situation will not hold because the Covid-19 pandemic and the facility of extension of limitation ended much prior in time to the date of filing of the application under Section 42. Thus, the delay which has chanced in filing the proceedings under Section 42 by the appellant cannot be condoned, since having been preferred much beyond the prescribed period of limitation of 14 days as provided under Section 42 of the I & B Code, 2016.
In view of the aforesaid, this Tribunal does not find any legal or factual error in the Impugned Judgment as rendered by the learned Adjudicating Authority in rejecting the application preferred under Section 42 on the ground of limitation.
Thus, the Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 367 / 2024 lacks merit and the same is accordingly dismissed. All connected pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, would stand closed.