Koneru Subbiah Chowdry vs Indian Overseas Bank, ASMB Hyderabad & Anr.

In Comp App (AT) (CH) (Ins) No.43/2025, Koneru Subbiah Chowdry Vs Indian Overseas Bank, ASMB Hyderabad & Anr., the challenge is given to the impugned order dated 02.12.2024, as it has been passed by the NCLT, Hyderabad Bench in IA No.2276/2024 as rendered in CP(IB) No.35(HYD)2022.

In the connected appeal being Comp App (AT) (CH) (Ins) No.44/2025, yet again the challenge has been given to the impugned order dated 02.12.2024, as it has been passed by the NCLT, Hyderabad Bench in IA No.2277/2024, as rendered in CP(IB) No.37(HYD)2022, Mrs. K. Uma Chowdry Vs Indian Overseas Bank, ASMB Hyderabad & Anr.

Both these company appeals are accompanied with respective Condone Delay Applications being IA No.153/2025 and IA No.155/2025, where the appellant has sought a condonation of 15 days of delay as pleaded in the application. But the facts, which could be borne out from the record and as per the contents of the Delay Condonation Application the following dates would be relevant.

The impugned order in each of the appeals was rendered on 02.12.2024.

It is admitted by the Appellant in the application filed for the Condonation of Delay that, the knowledge of the impugned order was attributed to the Appellant on 07.12.2024.

It is further admitted by the Appellant that the impugned order was uploaded on 16.12.2024.

According to the report of the Registry, the appeal was e-filed on 21.01.2025.

The Registry has reported there is a delay of 20 days which has chanced in preferring the appeal.

There is nothing on record or in the pleadings raised by the Appellant that, after getting the initial knowledge of the passing of the order of 02.12.2024, he had ever applied by filing a requisite application, for obtaining the Certified Copy of the order. That, in itself speaks about the diligence on the part of the Appellant in contesting the proceedings on its merits. Even the appeal itself is not accompanied with the Certified Copy of the impugned order and instead, an exemption has been sought from filing a Certified Copy, which itself establishes and amounts to admission that till the date of filing of the instant Appeal before the registry of this Tribunal, no Certified Copy was applied for. In that eventuality, for all practical aspects, the limitation for the purposes of preferring of these company appeals has to be determined from the date of the impugned order and not from the date of the knowledge or the uploading, in the absence of the Appellant having filed the application for obtaining the Certified Copy of the impugned order which could have shown his diligence in pursuing the Appeal. If that be the situation, the appeal would be barred by limitation as preferred beyond the period as contemplated under the proviso to Sub-Section (2) of Section 61 of I & B Code, 2016, because the upper limit of 45 days has already expired and beyond, which this Appellate Tribunal cannot exercise its discretion for extension of the period of limitation.

Thus, the Appeal would stand dismissed. Accordingly, the respective Delay Condonation Applications being IA No.153/2025 & IA No.155/2025, would stand rejected and as a consequence thereto the respective Appeals too would stand dismissed.