TATA STEEL LTD. versus RAJ KUMAR BANERJEE & ORS.

TATA STEEL LTD. versus RAJ KUMAR BANERJEE & ORS.

The limitation period under section 61(2) IBC began on the date of pronouncement of the NCLT order (07.04.2022) and the statutory maximum period for filing the appeal was 45 days (30 + 15). The respondent filed beyond that period. Section 4 of the Limitation Act does not operate to extend the discretionary condonable period; the NCLAT lacked jurisdiction to condone delay beyond 15 days. Consequently, the NCLAT order condoning delay was ultra vires and was set aside; appeal allowed.

Parties
Appellant: Tata Steel Ltd.; Respondent: Raj Kumar Banerjee & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
07 May 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (civil Appeal No. 408 of 2023) / Appeal — Judgment on Merits by Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Limitation, Condonation of Delay, Appeals to NCLAT, Computation of Limitation Period, Prescribed Period Under Limitation Act, Section 61(2) IBC, Section 238 a IBC, Section 4 Limitation Act, Rule 3 NCLAT Rules
Insolvency Law Limitation Law Tribunal/administrative Law Civil Procedure Limitation Condonation of Delay Appeals to NCLAT Computation of Limitation Period +5 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 6 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tata Steel Ltd.

Appellant

Raj Kumar Banerjee & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (civil Appeal No. 408 of 2023) / Appeal — Judgment on Merits by Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the additional condonable period of 15 days under section 61(2) IBC commences from the end of the prescribed 30-day limitation period when that day falls on a day the court is closed or from the day the court reopens
  2. 2 What is the meaning of 'prescribed period' under Section 2(j) read with Section 4 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and Rule 3 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016
  3. 3 Whether the NCLAT has power to condone delay beyond the prescribed and condonable periods under the IBC

Ratio Decidendi

The limitation period under section 61(2) IBC began on the date of pronouncement of the NCLT order (07.04.2022) and the statutory maximum period for filing the appeal was 45 days (30 + 15). The respondent filed beyond that period. Section 4 of the Limitation Act does not operate to extend the discretionary condonable period; the NCLAT lacked jurisdiction to condone delay beyond 15 days. Consequently, the NCLAT order condoning delay was ultra vires and was set aside; appeal allowed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The order dated 14.12.2022 passed by the NCLAT in I.A.No.1667 of 2022 in CA (AT) (Insolvency) No.615 of 2022 is set aside
  • Connected miscellaneous applications, if any, stand closed