Keshav Kumar Nachani Vs Encore Asset Reconstruction Company Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. (NCLAT Delhi)
Summary: The instant interlocutory application was moved by Keshav Kumar Nachani, appellant in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 1324 of 2026, seeking condonation of 43 days’ delay in filing an appeal against the National Company Law Tribunal, Indore Bench order dated 17.04.2026 in CP(IB) No. 60 of 2021. The appellant stated that his earlier counsel did not promptly inform him of the order; after learning of it, he contacted present counsel and applied for a certified copy on 19.05.2026. He submitted that time was thereafter consumed in examining pleadings, the report under Section 99 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and documents relied upon by the parties.
The respondent opposed condonation, contending that the appeal was filed beyond the maximum 45-day period available under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and that the Appellate Tribunal had no jurisdiction to condone such delay. The respondent also distinguished Sagufa Ahmed and Others versus Upper Assam Plywood Products Private Limited and others on the basis of the difference between Section 421 of the Companies Act and Section 61 of the IBC.
The Tribunal recorded that the impugned order was pronounced on 17.04.2026, so limitation commenced on 18.04.2026. The 30-day statutory period expired on 17.05.2026, whereas the appeal was e-filed on 29.06.2026, resulting in a delay of 43 days. In considering the limitation issue, the Tribunal relied substantially on the Supreme Court’s decision in V Nagarajan v. SKS Ispat and Power Ltd., including its treatment of the distinction between the Companies Act and the IBC, the obligation to apply for a certified copy, and the strict statutory framework under Section 61(2).
