A. RAJENDRA versus GONUGUNTA MADHUSUDHAN RAO & ORS.

A. RAJENDRA versus GONUGUNTA MADHUSUDHAN RAO & ORS.

The limitation period for filing an appeal under Section 61(2) of the IBC starts from the date of pronouncement of the NCLT order (or the date of upload when there is no pronouncement on that day); a litigant who has not applied for a certified copy cannot claim delay on account of non-availability of the certified copy, Rule 22(2) NCLAT Rules requires a certified copy to accompany the appeal, and the proviso to Section 61(2) permits only up to a 15-day extension on showing sufficient cause; therefore the appeals filed beyond the statutory periods without having sought certified copies or sufficient cause were rightly dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: A. Rajendra; Respondent(s): Gonugunta Madhusudhan Rao & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
04 April 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court From NCLAT Order Dated 18.01.2024 (caat(ch) (i) Nos. 364 and 365 of 2023)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed and impugned NCLAT order upheld
Legal Topics
Commencement of Limitation Period for Appeals, Condonation of Delay, Obligation to Obtain Certified Copy of Order, Interpretation of Proviso to Section 61(2) IBC
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 Limitation Act, 1963 Companies Act, 2013 NCLAT Rules, 2016 IBBI (insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 Commencement of Limitation Period for Appeals Condonation of Delay Obligation to Obtain Certified Copy of Order +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A. Rajendra

Appellant

Gonugunta Madhusudhan Rao & Ors.

Respondent(s)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court From NCLAT Order Dated 18.01.2024 (caat(ch) (i) Nos. 364 and 365 of 2023)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the period of limitation to file an appeal under the IBC starts from the date of pronouncement of the order or from the date the order is communicated/made available to the parties
  2. 2 Whether failure to apply for/obtain a certified copy delays commencement of the limitation period
  3. 3 Whether NCLAT can condone delay beyond 15 days under the proviso to Section 61(2) of the IBC

Ratio Decidendi

The limitation period for filing an appeal under Section 61(2) of the IBC starts from the date of pronouncement of the NCLT order (or the date of upload when there is no pronouncement on that day); a litigant who has not applied for a certified copy cannot claim delay on account of non-availability of the certified copy, Rule 22(2) NCLAT Rules requires a certified copy to accompany the appeal, and the proviso to Section 61(2) permits only up to a 15-day extension on showing sufficient cause; therefore the appeals filed beyond the statutory periods without having sought certified copies or sufficient cause were rightly dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed and impugned NCLAT order upheld

Orders

  • Impugned order dated 18.01.2024 of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal upheld
  • There shall be no orders as to costs