Ritu Shree Somani Vs Bank of Baroda (NCLAT Delhi)
NCLAT Delhi held that Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code [IBC] being a time bound matter, refiling delay in appeals is not condonable without any strong and credible reasons. Accordingly, application for condonation of delay in refiling appeal rejected.
Facts- Present set of applications praying for condonation of refiling delay in respective Appeals preferred by six Applicants against order dated 13.06.2024 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Court-III, New Delhi) admitting application under Section 95 of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC).
Conclusion- We are, therefore, not persuaded to accept that all the Applicants had been prevented by any exceptional reason beyond their control in acting in a timely fashion to cure the defects. We cannot condone refiling delays without strong and credible reasons as sympathy or equity cannot override the stringent timelines of IBC especially with several judgements of the Hon’ble Apex Court having emphasised that time is of essence in IBC proceedings. We cannot allow any compromise of the well settled precept of “timeliness” which constitutes one of the cardinal hallmarks of the statutory framework of IBC.
Held that in this case there was gross inaction, negligence and display of lethargy on the part of the Applicant in curing the defects. In the given facts and circumstances, IBC being a time bound matter, we cannot perceive refiling delays spreading from 141 to 160 days as a non-serious matter.
