# In the matter of Jain Irrigation Systems Limited Vs. Empee Sugars and Chemicals Limited  CA (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 138 of 2021

> NCLAT judgment dated 2021-07-15. Citation: TCN-2021-NCLAT-00186. The case involves an appeal against an order dated 04.03.2021 passed by the Adjudicating…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 15 Jul 2021
- **Citation:** TCN-2021-NCLAT-00186
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/jain-irrigation-systems-limited-vs-empee-sugars-and-chemicals-limited-ca-6ebef7fe

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against an order dated 04.03.2021 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Amaravati Bench) in IA/186/2020 in CP(IB)No.88/9/AMR/2020, which dismissed the application filed by the Appellant/Operational Creditor under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The Appellant sought condonation of a 241-day delay in filing a Company Petition under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). The Adjudicating Authority held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act is not applicable when a Company Petition is filed beyond the limitation period. The Appellant argued that the delay should be condoned due to various factors, including the COVID-19 pandemic and prior proceedings before the BIFR.

## Facts

Jain Irrigation Systems Limited, the Appellant/Operational Creditor, filed an appeal against the order dated 04.03.2021 in IA/186/2020 in CP(IB)No.88/9/AMR/2020 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Amaravati Bench). The Appellant had filed a Company Petition under Section 9 of the IBC, 2016, seeking initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Empee Sugars and Chemicals Limited, the Respondent/Corporate Debtor. The application was filed with a delay of 241 days, and the Appellant sought condonation of the delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the application for condonation of delay, leading to the appeal. The Appellant argued that the delay was due to prior

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority was correct in dismissing the application for condonation of …

**Ratio:** The condonation of delay is a matter of discretion of the Court/Tribunal, and the

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal found that the Appellant had not provided sufficient justification for the

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of 'sufficient cause' for condonation of delay is crucial.

…

**Application:** In this case, the Tribunal found that the Appellant's explanation for the delay

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Venugop…; V. P. S…
- **Appellants:** Jain Irrigation…
- **Respondents:** Empee Sugars and…

## Timeline

- **2011-03-21 — Date of D…**: The respondent/corporate debtor is due…
- **2013-01-01 — Company Petiti…**: Applicant/operational creditor filed a Company Petition bearing no.200 of 2013 before the…

## 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/jain-irrigation-systems-limited-vs-empee-sugars-and-chemicals-limited-ca-6ebef7fe