# In the matter of Brijesh Haridas Nagar Co-op. Hsg Soc. Ltd. vs. VAS Infrastructure Ltd. & Anr.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2024-09-09. Citation: TCN-2024-NCLAT-00210. This case involves an appeal against an order dated 2024-03-11 passed by the Adjudicating…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 9 Sept 2024
- **Citation:** TCN-2024-NCLAT-00210
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/brijesh-haridas-nagar-co-op-hsg-soc-ltd-vs-vas-infrastructure-ltd-anr-dd000e70

## Summary

### Background

This case involves an appeal against an order dated 2024-03-11 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench), which admitted a company petition filed by Canara Bank under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against VAS Infrastructure Ltd. The appellant, Brijesh Haridas Nagar Co-op. Hsg Soc. Ltd., filed an appeal along with an application seeking condonation of a 51-day delay in filing the appeal. The society claimed that the Corporate Debtor had mortgaged the land on which the residential flats have been constructed and are owned by the society.

## Facts

The Adjudicating Authority (NCLT, Mumbai Bench) passed an order on 2024-03-11 admitting a company petition filed by Canara Bank under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against VAS Infrastructure Ltd. The default amount was Rs. 301,06,84,507.23/-. Ashok Kumar Golechha was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional. Brijesh Haridas Nagar Co-op. Hsg Soc. Ltd. filed an appeal against this order, claiming a 51-day delay in filing. The society argued that the Corporate Debtor had mortgaged the land on which the residential flats were constructed and owned by the society. The society claimed they only became aware of the CIRP order on 2024-05-10 when Form G was published. The appeal was

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the delay of 51 days in filing the appeal …

**Ratio:** The Appellate Tribunal has the jurisdiction to condone a delay not exceeding 15 days from

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the delay exceeded the permissible 15-day period beyond the

…

**Interpretation:** Section 61(2) of the IBC provides a 30-day period for filing an appeal, with a

…

**Application:** In this case, the delay was 51 days, exceeding the 45-day limit. Therefore, the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Rakesh Kuma…; Indevar P…
- **Appellants:** Brijesh Haridas…
- **Respondents:** VAS Infrastructure…

## Timeline

- **2024-03-11 — Order by Adjudicating…**: The Adjudicating Authority (NCLT, Mumbai Bench) passed an order admitting a company…
- **2024-05-10 — Appellant's Claimed…**: The appellant claimed they became aware of…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 7 — Initiation of corporate insolvency resolution…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-7)

---

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/brijesh-haridas-nagar-co-op-hsg-soc-ltd-vs-vas-infrastructure-ltd-anr-dd000e70