Regional Provident Fund Commissioner – II (Legal) vs Mr. Jasin Jose

[Per: Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, Member (Judicial)]

In this Company Appeal, the Appellant questions the propriety of the Impugned Order dated 28.06.2024, as it has been rendered in IA(IBC)/258/KOB/2024 in IBA/19/KOB/2019, being the proceedings, that were held before the NCLT, Kochi Bench, under Section 60 (5) of the I & B Code, 2016, to be read with Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules, 2016. The consequential effect of the Impugned Order has been that, the Interlocutory Application as preferred by the Appellant, had been rejected, holding thereof to be highly belated, since it has suffered with a delay of 953 days in submitting the claim before the liquidator. This instant Company Appeal is accompanied with two Interlocutory Applications being IA No.998/2025 and IA No.999/2025. In IA No.998/2025, the Appellant has sought a condonation of 45 days of delay, which has chanced in refiling the Appeal. The reason for the delay in refiling has been explained by the Appellant in para 11 of the said Application which is that, the delay caused was due to the fact that the Appellant encountered various difficulties in getting the records from Kochi and therefore considerable time was required to prepare the file, after getting proper legal opinion, so as to rectify defects, which was pointed out by the Registry which was caused a delay of 45 days in refiling the Appeal. After having considered the reasons given and the arguments as extended by the Learned Counsel for the Appellant, the IA No.998/2025 would hereby stand allowed and the delay of 45 days (as pointed out by the Registry) would stand condoned.

In IA No.999/2025, the Appellant seeks condonation of 12 days of delay in filing the appeal, on the ground that the Application for procuring the Certified Copy of the Order was filed by the Appellant on 02.07.2024, which is well within the limitation period as prescribed under the proviso to Sub-Section (2) of Section 61 of the I & B Code, 2016, and the copy of the same was issued to the Appellant only on 08.07.2024 and thereafter, the Appeal was filed on 16.08.2024. In the light of the provision contained under Section 12 Sub-Section (2) of the Limitation Act, the time spent from 02.07.2024 to 08.07.2024, is to be excluded and after its exclusion, as per the report of the registry delay in preferring the Appeal is of 12 days. Having gone through the reasons given by the Appellant for seeking condonation of 12 days of delay as contained in para 8 of the Application which are that the Certified Copy was supplied only on 08.07.2025 and the EPFO being a large organisation, certain codal formalities had to be fulfilled for filing of the Appeal and finding the reasons to be satisfactory coupled with the fact that, the appeal had been filed well within the upper limit of 45 days as prescribed under proviso to Sub-Section (2) of Section 61 of the I & B Code, 2016, the delay in filing the Appeal would stand condoned. Accordingly, IA No.999/2025 would stand disposed of.

Heard the Learned Counsel for the Appellant on the merits of the Appeal. Certain dates which are necessary for consideration of the dispute are as under:-

The proceedings under Section 33(2) of the I & B Code, 2016, was put to motion and accordingly, public notices were issued inviting claims. The last date of submission of claim as per the said notice was fixed to be 08.07.2021. However, the Appellant did not file the claim by the said date, and admittedly the claim was filed by him vide Form G for the first time on 20.02.2024, at a much highly belated stage. The claim was rejected by liquidator on 26.02.2024. The Appellant filed an Application before Learned Adjudicating Authority to consider the claims which was rejected by Learned Adjudicating Authority vide the impugned order, which is subject matter of challenge in the instant Company Appeal.

On the simpliciter reading of the aforesaid detail, which are admitted, the claim filed by the Appellant happens to be much beyond the prescribed period. The same has been rejected by the Tribunal on the ground that the Tribunal did not find any logic in the Application thus preferred by the Appellant for the purpose of seeking condonation of delay of 953 days in filing of the claim, as the last date, for filing the claim was 08.07.2021 and the claim itself was filed on 20.02.2024 after a delay of 953 days which is in violation to the provisions of Section 38 of I & B Code, 2016, which prescribes for that the claim are to be filed within 30 days from the date of the commencement of the liquidation process. Though belated submission of the claim to the liquidator can be permitted under exceptional circumstances, where the delay happens to be reasonably explained, in the instant case there is no such exceptional circumstances and the claim has been filed with a delay of 953 days, which does not deserve consideration and hence the same has been rightly rejected.

The Learned Counsel for the Appellant in support of his contention has referred to a number of judgments that, he intended to rely upon as referred to in the application, but if we go through the pleading which has been raised thereto, in the context of the authorities relied, they all relate to the merits of the claim as to what implications of the provisions contained under Section 53b (i) would have qua the claim pertaining to the provisions contained under Section 14B & 7Q of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provision Act of 1952. None of the authorities that have been relied upon by the Learned Counsel for the Appellant deal with the issue about the aspect of condonation of delay, particularly when it happens to be inordinate. Even on perusal of the Application itself, the Appellant has very vaguely given the reasons for seeking condonation of delay in filing the claim, except for the fact that, the Appellant while seeking a condonation of delay while invoking the provisions contained under Section 60(5) of the I & B Code, 2016, had tried to justify the claim, rather than the delay of the claim. Since there was almost 953 days of delay which is a fact admitted by the Appellant, since the Appellant also admits the fact about the intimation being already received by the Appellant after the notification of the invitation of the claim by the liquidator and despite of it, submission of the claim in the shape of Form G on 20.02.2024, is a highly belated claim and that has been rightly rejected by the Learned Tribunal by the Impugned Order and the delay as such, which has chanced in preferring the claim does not deserves to be condoned. Hence, consequentially the Company Appeal too is accordingly dismissed. Any pending application would stand closed.