# In the matter of Gajjala Yoganand vs. Birendra Kumar Agarwal and Anr.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2025-04-28. Citation: TCN-2025-NCLAT-00080. The case involves two company appeals, CA (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 131/2025 and CA (AT) (CH) (Ins)…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 28 Apr 2025
- **Citation:** TCN-2025-NCLAT-00080
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/gajjala-yoganand-vs-birendra-kumar-agarwal-and-anr-967a3c1d

## Summary

### Background

The case involves two company appeals, CA (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 131/2025 and CA (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 133/2025, filed by the same appellant, Mr. Gajjala Yoganand, challenging orders related to the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) of Manjeera Retail Holdings Private Limited. The appeals are accompanied by applications seeking condonation of delay in refiling. CA (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 131/2025 challenges an order dated 18.06.2024, which rejected an application to raise additional grounds in a pending application. CA (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 133/2025 challenges an order dated 18.06.2024, related to the Corporate Debtor being a registered MSME Company and the eligibility of the Appellant to submit a resolution plan.

## Facts

Mr. Gajjala Yoganand, a member of the suspended Board of Directors of Manjeera Retail Holdings Private Limited, filed two company appeals, CA (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 131/2025 and CA (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 133/2025, challenging orders related to the CIRP of Manjeera Retail Holdings Private Limited. The appeals were delayed in refiling by 210 and 213 days, respectively. The appellant attributed the delay to the misplacement of physical copies of the appeals during transit from Hyderabad to Chennai and the need to obtain legible copies of essential documents. The defects in the e-filed appeals were communicated to the appellant via email on 22.07.2024 and 19.07.2024 for the respective appeals, with a seven-day period to rectify them. The appeals were refiled on 23.02.2025. The

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the delay of 210 days in refiling CA …

**Ratio:** The condonation of delay requires sufficient cause to be shown, and the reasons must be

…

**Reasoning:** The court found the reasons provided by the appellant (misplacement of documents and need

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of 'sufficient cause' requires a party seeking condonation

…

**Application:** The court applied the principles of condonation of delay to the specific facts

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Sharad Kumar…; Jatindranat…
- **Appellants:** Gajjala Yo…
- **Respondents:** Manjeera Retail…; Birendra Kumar…

## Timeline

- **2024-05-08 — Hearing on IA No.…**: Hearing on IA No. 765/2024, a…
- **2024-06-05 — Order Reserved on IA…**: Order was reserved on…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 240 — Power to make regulations](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-240)

---

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/gajjala-yoganand-vs-birendra-kumar-agarwal-and-anr-967a3c1d