The case involves an appeal that was filed with a delay of 387 days. The appellant sought to invoke Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules to mitigate the hardship caused by the delay, arguing that there was sufficient ground/lawful excuse for the delay exceeding 45 days.
The appellant, Mrs. Jamal Ahmad, filed an appeal against Reliance Nippon Life Asset Management & Anr. The appeal was delayed by 387 days. Section 61(2) of the I&B Code prescribes a 30-day period for filing appeals, with a 15-day extension possible for sufficient cause. The appellant argued that Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules should be invoked to mitigate the hardship caused by the delay. The court found that the delay exceeded the permissible limit and that the inherent powers under Rule 11 could not override the express provisions of the statute.
Sign in to view the parties.
The appeal is dismissed as hopelessly barred…
The case involves an appeal that was filed with a delay of 387 days. The appellant sought to invoke Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules to mitigate the hardship caused by the delay, arguing that there was sufficient ground/lawful excuse for the delay exceeding 45 days.
The appellant, Mrs. Jamal Ahmad, filed an appeal against Reliance Nippon Life Asset Management & Anr. The appeal was delayed by 387 days. Section 61(2) of the I&B Code prescribes a 30-day period for filing appeals, with a 15-day extension possible for sufficient cause. The appellant argued that Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules should be invoked to mitigate the hardship caused by the delay. The court found that the delay exceeded the permissible limit and that the inherent powers under Rule 11 could not override the express provisions of the statute.
The appeal is dismissed as hopelessly barred…