Back
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Sharad Kumar Sharma, Judicial Member
HUSSAIN SOMJEE – Appellant
Versus
ASSETS CARE AND RECONSTRUCTION ENTERPRISE LIMITED – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of appeals and delay condonation applications. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. appellant's contention: limitation from order upload date. (Para 6 , 7 , 9 , 10 , 12 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 3. court holds appeals time-barred; delay not condoned. (Para 11 , 25 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 4. respondent's argument: limitation from pronouncement date. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. precedents on limitation computation and section 12. (Para 16 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
[ORAL JUDGMENT: Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, Member (Judicial)] 10.02.2026:
These are two company appeals, and at the stage when we are considering these company appeals, we have been called upon to consider the accompanying Condone Delay Applications, which had been filed in support of the respective Company Appeals.
2. The Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No.597/2025 has been preferred by the Appellant by invoking the provisions contained under Section 61 of I & B Code, 2016, being aggrieved against the impugned order of 01.08.2025 that was passed on IA No. 323/2025, as preferred in CP (IB) No. 15/BB/2023, passed by the Ld. NCLT Bengaluru Bench, which had dismissed the said application filed by the A
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
