##PAGE1##

-1-

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

Company Appeal (AT) No. 279 of 2026 &

I.A. No. 4969, 5036 of 2026

IN THE MATTER OF:

Madhumita Adhikary & Anr. …Appellant Versus

Parijat Roy & Ors. ...Respondents

Present:

For Appellants : For Respondents :

O R D E R

(Hybrid Mode)

03.08.2026: In the instant company appeal, by an order passed by us on 29.07.2026, in the presence of the appellant’s counsel, the matter was

directed to be listed on 03.08.2026, hence it is before us today.

2. Despite repeated calls none appears for the appellant, hence, we are

constraint to proceed to decide the company appeal on its own merits.

3. In the instant company appeal the appellant had challenged the impugned order that was passed as back as on 11.11.2021, by the Ld. NCLT, Kolkata Bench in CP (IB) No. 1279/KB/2018. By virtue of an impugned order the proceedings those were taken before the Ld. Tribunal, was adjudicated on merits and as the consequence thereto, the proceedings preferred under Section 241 & 242 of the Companies Act, 2013 was disposed

of.

Company Appeal (AT) No. 279 of 2026

-2-

4. As against the said order the instant company appeal has been preferred by the appellant before the registry of this tribunal by e-filing the same belatedly only on 27.04.2026, there happens to be an apparent delay of

1662 days in preferring the appeal.

5. For the purposes of seeking its condonation the appellant had filed a delay condonation application being I.A. No. 5036 of 2026 wherein he has attempted to explain the delay by virtue of the pleadings that, has been raised in paragraph 3 & 4 of the said application, which are extracted below:

“3. That thereafter the present applicant Madhumita Adhikary was not at all acquainted with case as she was not physically well and she was in dark, the appellant slowly recovered and started searching regarding case, then one of staff of the company informed the appellant regarding this case and also conducting advocate Joy Saha. The appellant approached the Ld. Advocate and expressed her inability to bear such huge expenses for appeal. The appellant approached one of the shareholder of the respondent no.1, M/s. Panagarh Cold Storage Private Limited namely Dilip Kumar Roy for some fund. The said Dilip Roy became agree to arrange money and assured the appellant to file such appeal. Thereafter the appellant approached the Ld. Advocate Jay Saha to handover the brief. The appellant upon payment of artcar legal fees to Ld. Advocate Joy Saha took the brief. After all, the appellant mentally prepared to file the instant appeal, but a considerable period of valuable time passed and the present appeal is being filed after 1662 days from the date of passing the impugned order dated November 11. 2021 read with

the order dated November 19, 2019.

4. That the delay in filing of the accompanying appeal was neither intentional nor deliberate but because of the reasons mentioned herein above. No prejudice shall be caused to either of the sides in case the present appeal is heard and decided by this Hon’ble Tribunal on merit however the appellant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury in case the present appeal is not heard and

decided on merit by this Hon’ble Appellate Tribunal.”

Company Appeal (AT) No. 279 of 2026

-3-

6. If we simplicitor go through the reasons that, has been assigned in paragraph 3 & 4 of the said application, the reasons given therein will not at all justify a satisfactory explanation considering the number of days of delay

that has chanced in preferring the appeal.

7. Coupled with the fact that the number of days of delays that, is being sought to be condoned, since it falls beyond the ambit of sub section 3 of Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013 and even beyond the condonable period of delays the delay condonation application deserves to be rejected, the same is accordingly rejected and in the consequence thereto, the company appeal too would stand dismissed. All pending inter