# In the matter of Anthony Raphael Kallarakkal Vs. Rajendra K. Bhuta & Ors. CA (AT) No. 608 to 610-2018

> NCLAT judgment dated 2018-11-12. Citation: TCN-2018-NCLAT-00062. The case involves an appeal filed by Mr. Anthony Raphael Kallarakkal against an order dated…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 12 Nov 2018
- **Citation:** TCN-2018-NCLAT-00062
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/anthony-raphael-kallarakkal-vs-rajendra-k-bhuta-ors-ca-e61bda99

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal filed by Mr. Anthony Raphael Kallarakkal against an order dated 18th August, 2017, 5th April, 2018, and 18th July, 2018, along with a petition for condonation of delay. The appeal contests orders dated 18th July, 2018, and 18th August, 2017. The corporate insolvency resolution process was initiated against the 'corporate debtor' based on an application under Section 7 of the I&B Code filed by 'The Abhyudaya Co-operative Bank Limited' (Financial Creditor). A Miscellaneous Application was filed by the 'Resolution Professional' concerning a property. The Adjudicating Authority observed that promoters and directors obstructing liquidation would face penal consequences. The application filed on 9th June, 2017, under Section 7 of the I&B

…

## Facts

Mr. Anthony Raphael Kallarakkal filed an appeal against orders dated 18th August, 2017, 5th April, 2018, and 18th July, 2018. The appeal was accompanied by a petition for condonation of delay. The orders being appealed were dated 18th July, 2018, and 18th August, 2017. The 'corporate insolvency resolution process' was initiated against the 'corporate debtor' based on an application under Section 7 of the I&B Code filed by 'The Abhyudaya Co-operative Bank Limited'. A Miscellaneous Application was filed by the 'Resolution Professional' regarding a property. The Adjudicating Authority noted that obstructing liquidation could lead to penal consequences. The application under Section 7 was admitted on 9th June, 2017, and a moratorium was passed. The appellant challenged

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the appeal is barred by limitation …

**Ratio:** Appeals must be filed within the prescribed limitation period as per Section 61(2) of the

…

**Reasoning:** The court observed that the appeal was filed after the limitation period had expired. The

…

**Interpretation:** Section 61(2) of the I&B Code sets a strict timeline for filing appeals.

…

**Application:** The court applied the principle of limitation strictly, finding that the appeal

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** S.J. Mukhop…; Bansi Lal…
- **Appellants:** Anthony Raphael…
- **Respondents:** Rajendra K.…
- **Advocates:** Rajvardhan…; Rajeev K.…; +5 more

## Timeline

- **2017-06-09 — Application…**: Application filed under…
- **2017-08-18 — Order Da…**: Order dated 18th August, 2017,…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 61 — Appeals and Appellate Authority](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-61)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/anthony-raphael-kallarakkal-vs-rajendra-k-bhuta-ors-ca-e61bda99