Delay in Filing of Appeal Beyond Maximum Allowable Period U/s 61 of IBC Couldn’t Be Condoned | SC

  • News|Blog|Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code|
  • 2 Min Read
  • By Taxmann
  • |
  • Last Updated on 10 April, 2024


Case Details: Punjab National Bank (International Limited) v. Perfect Day Inc - [2024] 161 279 (SC)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

  • Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Cji., J B Pardiwala & Manoj Misra, JJ.
  • Mithilesh Kr. Pandey, Adv. & Aviral Kashyap, AOR for the Petitioner.
  • Mukul RohatgiRajshekar Rao, Sr. Advs. Shreeyash Uday LalitAbhinav AggarwalHimanshu Vats, Advs. & Ishaan George, AOR for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, an application u/s 7 of the IBC filed against the corporate debtor was admitted and subsequently, the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) ordered for the liquidation of the corporate debtor.

The liquidator took over the corporate debtor and published public notice and bids were invited from parties as a whole on a going concern basis. In an e-auction process of the corporate debtor, respondent no. 1 was declared as a successful bidder.

Respondent no. 1 then filed an application before the NCLT seeking permission to execute and conclude the purchase/acquisition of the corporate debtor along with the necessary reliefs and concessions required for acquiring the corporate debtor as a going concern. The NCLT vide an order admitted the said application.

Thereafter, the appellant, who was a stakeholder, in the corporate debtor filed an appeal against the NCLT’s order. However, the NCLAT vide the impugned order dismissed the said appeal on the ground that the appellant was part of the CoC and participated in the liquidation process by filing its claim.

Supreme Court Held

Further, it was noted that the appellant’s claim was accepted and at no point of time, prior to the holding of an auction, any kind of objection was raised by the appellant regarding the reserve price or against the valuation obtained in the liquidation process by the liquidator. Then, the appellant challenged the NCLAT’s order before the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court held that since there was a delay in filling an instant appeal which was beyond the maximum period and could not be condoned. Therefore, an instant appeal was to be dismissed.

List of Cases Reviewed

Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Everything on Tax and Corporate Laws of India

To subscribe to our weekly newsletter please log in/register on