The Executive Engineer Tangedco vs Explora Retail Private Limited & Anr.

Heard, the Learned Counsel for the ‘Petitioner’ / ‘Appellant’ in IA No.943/2023 (Delay in Representation) in Comp App (AT) (CH) (Ins) No.307/2023.

According to the ‘Petitioner’ / ‘Appellant’, the instant ‘Appeal’ was filed on 27.02.2023 and the ‘Registry’ of this ‘Tribunal’, returned the ‘Appeal’ for certain compliance on 01.03.2023. Due to ill health, clerk attached to the office of ‘Appellant’ was on leave for a week and he joined on 07.03.2023, took the returned papers and able to comply the return defects, only on 15.03.2023. As such, there is a delay of 8 days, in representing the ‘Appeal’, before this ‘Tribunal’, which is neither wilful nor wanton, but due to the aforesaid reasons.

This ‘Tribunal’, on being subjectively satisfied as to the reasons ascribed on behalf of the ‘Petitioner’ / ‘Appellant’ vide Paragraph No.3 at the IA No.943/2023 (Delay in Representation), condones the delay of 8 days in representation, by taking a lenient and liberal view, keeping in mind of the fact, that the ‘Delay in Representation’, is between the ‘Petitioner’ / ‘Appellant’ and the concerned ‘Tribunal’. Resultantly, the IA No.943/2023 is ‘allowed’, but without costs.

According to the ‘Petitioner’ / ‘Appellant’, the Impugned Order, was passed on 12.01.2023 by the ‘National Company Law Tribunal’, Chennai Bench – I, the Certified Copy of the Impugned Order was received by the ‘Petitioner’ / ‘Appellant’ on 27.01.2023 and the Order came to be uploaded on the same day. The reasons ascribed on behalf of the ‘Petitioner’ / ‘Appellant’ in regard to the delay of 15 days (after the expiry of 30 days period from the date of deliverance of Order) is due to the fact that the ‘Petitioner’ / ‘Appellant’ was under the impression ‘Appeal’ can be filed 30 days’ time for filing the ‘Appeal’ from the date of receipt of the ‘Order of the Certified Copy’, and further section 22(2) of the NCLAT Rules 2016, Appeal shall be filed with Certified Copy of the Impugned Order and in this process, there has occasioned a delay of 15 days in preferring an ‘Appeal’, which is neither wilful nor wanton, but due to the aforesaid reasons.

Considering the fact, that the delay of 15 days in preferring an ‘Appeal’ (after the expiry of 30 days period) is envisaged the I & B Code, 2016, this ‘Tribunal’, by taking a lenient and liberal view condones the delay of 15 days (after the expiry of 30 days) on being subjectively satisfied, as to the reasons ascribed in Paragraph No.3 of IA No.944/2023, condones the delay of 15 days in preferring an ‘Appeal’ is ‘allowed’, but without costs.

After arguing the matter, the Learned Representing Counsel Ms. G.S. Dhanalakshmi, appearing for the Learned Counsel for the ‘Appellant’ Mr. S.T. Raja, seeks permission from this ‘Tribunal’ to ‘withdraw’ the instant Comp App (AT) (CH) (Ins) No.307/2023. Acceding to the said request, the instant Comp App (AT) (CH) (Ins) No.307/2023 is ‘dismissed’ as ‘withdrawn’. No cash. The Connected pending IA No.942/2023 is closed.