# In the matter of Employees Provident Fund Organisation vs. Nethi Mallikarjuna Setty I.A. No. 170,171 & 172 of 2023 in Comp App (AT)(CH)(Ins) No.49-2023

> NCLAT judgment dated 2023-03-13. Citation: TCN-2023-NCLAT-00681. The case arises from an appeal against an 'Impugned Order' dated 26.03.2021 passed by the…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 13 Mar 2023
- **Citation:** TCN-2023-NCLAT-00681
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/employees-provident-fund-organisation-vs-nethi-mallikarjuna-setty-ia-no-170171-1-628a4582

## Summary

### Background

The case arises from an appeal against an 'Impugned Order' dated 26.03.2021 passed by the 'Adjudicating Authority' (National Company Law Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench) in I.A. No. 87 of 2020 in Company Petition No.(IB) 08/9/HDB/2019. The appellant, Employees Provident Fund Organisation, filed the appeal after their claim was not considered due to the approval of a Resolution Plan submitted by the 2nd Respondent and approved by the Committee of Creditors. The appellant contends that the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned due to the COVID-19 pandemic and that they inadvertently filed an application before the 'Adjudicating Authority'/'Tribunal' against the rejection of their claim by the 'Resolution Professional'.

## Facts

The Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Patancheru, filed a Company Appeal (AT)(CH)(Ins) No. 49 of 2023 before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) against an order dated 26.03.2021 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Hyderabad Bench. The appellant's claim was not considered because the 2nd Respondent, Kamini Metalliks Pvt. Ltd., had submitted a Resolution Plan that was approved by the Committee of Creditors. The appellant filed an application before the 'Adjudicating Authority'/'Tribunal' against the rejection of their claim by the 'Resolution Professional', which was later dismissed. The appellant sought condonation of a 289-day delay in filing the appeal, citing the COVID-19 pandemic and inadvertent filing before the wrong forum.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the delay of 289 days in filing the Company Appeal can be condoned by the Appellate …

**Ratio:** Section 61(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, prescribes a 30-day period for

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code provides a strict timeline for

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of Section 61(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is

…

**Application:** The court applied the ratio to the facts of the case, noting that the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** M. Venu…; Shreesha…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Employees…
- **Respondents:** Nethi Mallikarjuna…

## Timeline

- **2021-03-26 — Impugned…**: Date of the Impugned Order passed by the 'Adjudicating Authority' in I.A. No. 87 of 2020…
- **2020-01-01 — Company Pe…**: Company Petition No.(IB) 08/9/HDB/2019…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 32 — Appeal](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-32)

---

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/employees-provident-fund-organisation-vs-nethi-mallikarjuna-setty-ia-no-170171-1-628a4582