AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ashok Bhushan, J.
This is an application praying for condonation of 55 days delay in filing the Appeal. This Appeal has been filed against the order dated 07.09.2022 passed in I.A. No. 3973/2020 in Company Petition (IB)-934(PB)/2018. This Appeal has been e-filed in this Tribunal on 20.12.2022 and physical copy of the Appeal was filed on 22.12.2022. There is a delay in filing the Appeal. Application has been filed seeking condonation of delay.
The Company Secretary appearing for the Appellant submits that delay in filing the Appeal be condoned. He relied on judgment of NCLAT at Chennai in “I.A. No. 990/2022 in Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 337/2022, M. K. Resely & Ors. vs. Union Bank of India & Ors.”.
The power to condone delay vested in this Tribunal under Section 61(2) proviso is only 15 days. We need to consider the judgment of this Tribunal in Chennai Bench which has been relied by the Appellant in support of his submission.
In the above case, this Tribunal relying on Section 14 of the Limitation Act has granted exclusion of the period from 25.01.2022 to 22.06.2022, during which period the Appellant of that case had indulged in bonafide litigious activity in preferring the Writ Petition No. 2832/2022 and Writ Appeal No. 537 of 2022 before the High Court of Kerala. In paragraph 36 of the judgment, this Tribunal has made following observations:
“36. In view of the fact, that the 'Petitioners' / "Appellants' have indulged in 'Bonafide Litigious Activity', in preferring the W.P. No.2832/2022 and WA. No.537/2022, before the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala, this Tribunal, by construing the ingredients of Section 14 of the 'Limitation Act' 1963, in a liberal manner and by applying 'Equity, permits the exclusion of period from 25.01.2022 till 22.06.2022' ('147 days'), in computing the 'Period of Limitation, and consequently disposes of the IA/990/2022, without Costs.”
Present is not a case where the Appellant is claiming any benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act. Appellant in the application has taken the ground that he received the impugned order dated 07.09.2022 on 24.11.2022 and the same was prepared by the registry on 16.11.2022 and due to health problems of the Appellant, the appellant could not provide the required documents and annexures. In paragraphs 3 and 5 of the application following has been stated:
“3. That the appellant received the impugned Order dated 07.09.2022 on 24.11.2022 as the same was prepared by the registry on 16.11.2022 on receipt of an application from the appellant on 04.11.2022 after the impugned order was uploaded online.
x….x…x
That due to health problems of the Applicant/Appellant, the appellant could not provide the required documents and annexures and thus there has been an unintentional delay of days in filing the appeal from 16.11.2022 (the date of preparation of the impugned order by the registry).”
The grounds as given in the application does not give any satisfactory cause for condonation of delay, which is beyond 15 days. The judgment of Chennai Bench of this Tribunal relied by the Appellant in M. K. Resely & Ors. vs. Union Bank of India & Ors. has no application in the facts of the present case. Hence, we are of the view that this application which prays of condonation of delay of 55 days cannot be accepted. Delay Condonation Application – I.A. No. 809 of 2023 is dismissed. Consequently, Memo of Appeal is also rejected.