ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN, NAVIN SINHA
BENGAL CHEMISTS & DRUGGISTS ASSN. – Appellant
Versus
KALYAN CHOWDHURY – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
R.F. Nariman, J.
1. The present appeal is against an order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal dated 31.07.2017 by which the Appellate Tribunal, after setting out Section 421(3) of the Companies Act, 2013, (for short 'the Act') has dismissed the appeal as not maintainable, inasmuch as the appeal has been filed 9 days after the period of limitation of 45 days has expired and a further period of another 45 days has also expired.
2. Mr. Jayant Mehta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, has argued the matter persuasively before us.
He points out that Section 421(3) of the Act does not contain the language of Section 34(3) proviso of the Arbitration Act, 1996 which contains the words “but not thereafter” which Union of India vs. Popular Construction Co. (2001) 8 SCC 470 considered. He further points out that, in any case, under Section 433 of the Act, the provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963 shall, as far as may be, apply to Appeals before the Appellate Tribunal and that therefore, Section 5 would be applicable to condone the delay beyond the period of 90 days. He has buttressed his submission by referring to various decisions of this Court.
3. Befor
Union of India vs. Popular Construction Co. (2001) 8 SCC 470 – Distinguished [Para 2]
Chhattisgarh SEB v. Central Electricity Regulatory Commission
ONGC v. Gujarat Energy Transmission Corporation Limited
Guda Vijayalakshmi v. Guda Ramachandra Sekhara Sastry
Dr. Partap Singh v. Director of Enforcement, Foreign Exchange Regulation Act
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.