# In the matter of Atul Babulal Prajapati & Anr. vs. Suhas Dinkar Bhattbhatt & Ors.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2025-03-06. Citation: TCN-2025-NCLAT-00180. This case involves an appeal filed against an order dated 2024-10-01 passed by the…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 6 Mar 2025
- **Citation:** TCN-2025-NCLAT-00180
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/atul-babulal-prajapati-anr-vs-suhas-dinkar-bhattbhatt-ors-151351db

## Summary

### Background

This case involves an appeal filed against an order dated 2024-10-01 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal) Ahmedabad, Division Bench, Court-1. The Resolution Professional's application, IA No.556/NCLT/AHM/2021, was partly allowed and partly rejected, leading the appellant to file the appeal. The appellant sought condonation of a 15-day delay in filing the appeal, claiming lack of knowledge of the order until a week after its pronouncement, citing his status as a vegetable vendor unfamiliar with legal procedures. The appellant argued that the delay should be condoned, referencing NCLAT Rules, 2016, regarding the exclusion of the judgment day in calculating the limitation period.

## Facts

The appellant, Atul Babulal Prajapati, filed an appeal against an order dated 2024-10-01 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) Ahmedabad. The appeal sought condonation of a 15-day delay in filing. The appellant claimed he only gained knowledge of the order a week after pronouncement, citing his unfamiliarity with legal processes as a vegetable vendor. The respondent, Suhas Dinkar Bhattbhatt, argued the appeal was filed beyond the condonable period and the delay condonation application should be rejected. The respondent stated the appellant was informed of the order via email on 2024-10-09 and 2024-10-23, and via WhatsApp on 2024-10-01. The appellant submitted a medical certificate to support the delay. The court noted the order was delivered on 2024-10-01 and

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the appeal was filed within the condonable period of 15 days as per Section 61(2) proviso …

**Ratio:** The jurisdiction to condone delay vested in the Tribunal is limited to 15 days as per

…

**Reasoning:** The court considered the date of the order (2024-10-01) and the date of filing the appeal

…

**Interpretation:** Section 61(2) proviso limits the Tribunal's power to condone delay to 15 days.

…

**Application:** Applying the ratio and reasoning, the court excluded 2024-10-01 and considered

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Barun M…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Atul Babulal…
- **Respondents:** WSH Pvt…; Suhas Dinkar…

## Timeline

- **2024-10-01 — Order Passed by…**: The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal) Ahmedabad, Division Bench,…
- **2024-10-01 — Appellant Communicated…**: The appellant was communicated about the…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 61(2) — 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/atul-babulal-prajapati-anr-vs-suhas-dinkar-bhattbhatt-ors-151351db