M/s. Petrofuel (T) Limited vs M/s. Progressive Constructions Ltd.

Oral Judgment: Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, Member (Judicial)

It is a peculiar way of institution of a company appeal, a process unknown to the eyes of law, where the Appellant while challenging the impugned order passed in a proceedings under Section 9 of the I&B Code, 2016, simultaneously invokes the provisions contained under Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013, as well as Section 61 of the I&B Code, which otherwise also is not conceived of under law.

The company appeal puts a challenge to the impugned order dated 04.08.2025, whereby the Appellant’s Restoration Application, seeking recall of the order deciding the Company Petition has been rejected on merits on the ground holding that, it is not maintainable.

Be that as it may, we are not venturing into the merits of the impugned order at this stage, for the reason being that the Appeal is reported to be delayed by 72 days.

If we go through the impugned order, the order was supplied and made available to the Appellant on 11.08.2025. But, the Appellant has chosen to e-file the Company Appeal only on 06.10.2025, which is much beyond the period of the upper limit of 45 days as prescribed under the proviso to Sub-Section 2 of Section 61 of the I & B Code, 2016.

General law of limitation, will not be applicable, where the aspect of limitation is self-contained under the special statute, and in the instant circumstances, even this Tribunal cannot exercise its powers beyond the condonable period of 15 days as provided under the proviso to Section 61(2) of the I & B Code, 2016. Owing to the aforesaid legal embargo, the Tribunals are not vested with powers to condone the delay than what is prescribed under law, i.e., 30 days period of limitation and 15 days of the condonable period.

It is seen that: -

On this limited score itself that, since the company appeal suffers from the bar of limitation, the same would stand ‘dismissed’.