2026 Supreme(SC) 673

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
DIPANKAR DATTA, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, JJ.
Thrani Industries Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
KNK Ship Management – Respondent
Civil Appeal No. of 2026 @ D.No. 61278 of 2025
Decided On : 25-05-2026

Courts will not condone significant delays in the re-filing of appeals where the applicant fails to demonstrate valid, sufficient cause, rejecting unsubstantiated or procedural excuses as insufficient to overcome statutory limitation periods.

Headnote:(A) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 62 - Appeal - Condonation of delay in re-filing - Requirement of sufficient cause - A party seeking condonation of delay in re-filing an appeal must demonstrate sufficient and bonafide cause; mere procedural excuses like unavailability of documents or unsubstantiated medical claims of representatives do not constitute 'sufficient cause' - Courts are mandated to ensure judicial discipline and strict adherence to limitation norms, and they will decline to exercise discretion when the explanation provided is found to be a 'lame excuse' without evidentiary support. (Paras 3, 4, 5)

Facts of the case:
An appeal was preferred against an order passed by an appellate tribunal. Though the main appeal was filed within the prescribed period of limitation, it was initially marked as defective. The re-filing of the appeal after curing these defects was delayed by 166 days. The appellant filed an application seeking condonation of this re-filing delay, citing the non-availability of typed pages and health issues of the authorized representative as primary reasons.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the appellant failed to show any real or sufficient cause for the substantial delay. The reasons provided were treated as merely formal or 'lame' excuses that did not justify the lapse in time. Consequently, the court held that no grounds existed to exercise discretion in favor of the appellant.

Issues: Whether the reasons provided by the appellant for the 166-day delay in re-filing the appeal constitute 'sufficient cause' for condonation of delay under the law.

Ratio Decidendi: Condonation of delay is not a matter of right but a judicial discretion that must be exercised only when a party proves substantial and valid reasons prevented the timely completion of procedural formalities; when such reasons are absent, the application for condonation must be rejected, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

Result: Application for condonation of delay dismissed; appeal dismissed.