# Keshav Kumar Nachani vs. Encore Asset Reconstruction Company Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2026-09-02. Citation: TCN-2026-NCLAT-00256. The appellant, Keshav Kumar Nachani, filed an appeal (Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 1324 of…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 2 Sept 2026
- **Citation:** TCN-2026-NCLAT-00256
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/keshav-kumar-nachani-vs-encore-asset-reconstruction-company-pvt-ltd-anr-2vdmm

## Summary

### Background

The appellant, Keshav Kumar Nachani, filed an appeal (Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 1324 of 2026) against an order dated April 17, 2026, pronounced by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Indore Bench in CP(IB) No. 60 of 2021. Concurrently, the appellant filed IA No. 5174 of 2026, seeking condonation of a 43-day delay in filing the appeal. The appellant contended that he was not promptly informed of the NCLT order by his previous counsel and that he applied for a certified copy on May 19, 2026, after which considerable time was spent examining relevant documents.

## Facts

IA No. 5174 of 2026 was moved by the applicant/appellant in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 1324 of 2026.

The appeal challenges an impugned order dated 17/4/2026 pronounced by the NCLT Indore Bench in CP(IB) No. 60 of 2021.

The application seeks to condone a delay of 43 days in filing the appeal.

The impugned order was pronounced on April 17, 2026.

The appellant claims he was not promptly informed of the order by his counsel who conducted proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority.

The appellant applied for a certified copy on May 19, 2026, which was made available thereafter.

Considerable time was consumed in examining pleadings, the report under Section 99 of the IBC, and other documents after receiving the certified copy.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has the jurisdiction to condone a delay …

**Ratio:** The NCLAT has no power to condone delay beyond the period stipulated under the statute,

…

**Reasoning:** The IBC is a complete code with strict procedural discipline and time-bound mechanisms.

…

**Interpretation:** The statutory provisions for limitation under the IBC are mandatory and

…

**Application:** In this case, the appeal was filed 43 days after the initial 30-day period

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Mohammad Faiz…; Naresh Sa…
- **Appellants:** Keshav Kumar…
- **Respondents:** Encore Asset…
- **Advocates:** Manoj M…; Jatin Se…; +4 more

## Timeline

- **2026-04-17 — Impugned Order…**: The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Indore Bench pronounced the impugned order in…
- **2026-04-18 — Limitation Period…**: The 30-day limitation period for filing an…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 99 — Submission of report by resolution professional](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-99)

---

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/keshav-kumar-nachani-vs-encore-asset-reconstruction-company-pvt-ltd-anr-2vdmm