# In the matter of Khurana & Co. Vs. Polo Amusement Park Ltd. CA(AT)(Ins) No. 534 of 2019

> NCLAT judgment dated 2019-12-02. Citation: TCN-2019-NCLAT-00071. The case involves an appeal against an order passed by the NCLT Delhi. The appellant sought…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 2 Dec 2019
- **Citation:** TCN-2019-NCLAT-00071
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/khurana-co-vs-polo-amusement-park-ltd-ca-6cb24dae

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against an order passed by the NCLT Delhi. The appellant sought time to file a rejoinder, which was opposed by the respondent, who argued that ample opportunity had already been given. The NCLT order under appeal had closed the right to file additional documents for the petitioner, as multiple opportunities had already been provided. The appellant is accused of dragging the proceedings.

## Facts

The appellant, Khurana & Co, filed an appeal against an order by NCLT Delhi. The respondent is Polo Amusement Park Ltd. The appellant requested two weeks to file a rejoinder, but the respondent opposed, stating the appellant had ample opportunity. The NCLT order, dated 2019-03-26, noted that the petitioner (presumably Khurana & Co) had been given a final opportunity on 2019-03-12 and 2019-03-19 to file additional documents. No additional documents were filed, and further time was requested, which the Corporate Debtor's counsel objected to. The NCLT closed the right to file additional documents. The appellant was not ready to argue the matter on merit. The court found the appellant was dragging the proceedings, which had been pending since 2019-05-08.

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the appellant should be granted …

**Ratio:** The court has the discretion to grant or deny requests for additional time based on the

…

**Reasoning:** The court found that the respondent had already been given ample opportunity and was

…

**Interpretation:** The court interpreted that granting further time would be prejudicial and would

…

**Application:** The court applied the ratio to the facts by noting that the appellant had

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Jarat Kuma…; Balvinder…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Khurana…
- **Respondents:** Polo Amusement…

## Timeline

- **2019-03-12 — Previous H…**: A last and final opportunity was given to the…
- **2019-03-19 — Previous H…**: A last and final opportunity was given to the…

---

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/khurana-co-vs-polo-amusement-park-ltd-ca-6cb24dae