Latest JudgementThe Limitation Act, 1963Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016
A Rajendra v. Gonuganta Madhusudhan Rao and Others, 2025
Limitation period for filing appeals under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code begins from the date of pronouncement of the order, with exceptions for certified copy applications.
Supreme Court of India·5 April 2025
Judgement Details
Court
Supreme Court of India
Date of Decision
5 April 2025
Judges
Justice AS Oka ⦁ Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah ⦁ Justice AG Masih
Citation
Acts / Provisions
Section 12(1) and Section 12(2) of Limitation Act 1963
Section 61 of the IBC
Facts of the Case
- The case involved appeals filed against orders of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), which had dismissed two appeals as time-barred.
- The appeals were filed under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) 2016.
- The Supreme Court examined the limitation period applicable to appeals under the IBC and the procedure for filing certified copies.
Issues
- What triggers the commencement of the limitation period under the IBC 2016?
- Whether the period for filing an appeal can be extended under the Limitation Act based on the application for a certified copy.
Judgement
- The Supreme Court held that the limitation period under the IBC 2016 starts from the date of pronouncement of the order in open court, or if not pronounced, from the date the order is uploaded on the website.
- If a judgment is pronounced in open court, the limitation period starts from the day of pronouncement.
- The Court clarified that if the certified copy of the order is under preparation, the party can seek relief under Section 12(2) of the Limitation Act to exclude the period for preparing the certified copy.
- The Court also emphasized that exemption from filing a certified copy cannot be claimed as a right, and benefit of Section 12 can only be claimed if an application for a certified copy is filed.
Held
- The Court dismissed the appeals, stating that the limitation started from the date of pronouncement of the order and not from when the certified copy was available.
- The Court ruled that the appellant, in this case, did not apply for a certified copy of the order, and therefore, the limitation period was not extended under Section 12(1) of the Limitation Act.
- It was held that if no certified copy is applied for, the appeal will be beyond limitation.
Analysis
- Limitation Period: The Court affirmed that the limitation for appeals under the IBC 2016 is strictly governed by the date of pronouncement of the order and cannot be extended unless the party applies for a certified copy.
- Certified Copy: The Court rejected the appellant's claim that the limitation should be reckoned from the date the certified copy was made available. The Court held that this was not applicable as the appellant did not apply for the certified copy in time.
- Exemption from Certified Copy Filing: The Court clarified that the exemption from filing a certified copy is not a matter of right and must comply with statutory requirements.