# In the matter of Satvir Singh Gulia vs. Emaar India Limited

> NCLAT judgment dated 2025-02-06. Citation: TCN-2025-NCLAT-00234. The case involves an appeal filed by Capt Satvir Singh Gulia (Appellant/Operational Creditor)…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 6 Feb 2025
- **Citation:** TCN-2025-NCLAT-00234
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/satvir-singh-gulia-vs-emaar-india-limited-5a95e019

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal filed by Capt Satvir Singh Gulia (Appellant/Operational Creditor) under Section 61(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), against an order passed by the 'Adjudicating Authority' (National Company Law Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi) in CP (IB) No. 1059/(PB)/2020. The appeal was delayed by 170 days in refiling, leading to an application for condonation of delay. The respondent, M/s Emaar India Limited, opposed the condonation of delay, arguing that the appellant was not vigilant in prosecuting the appeal and that the reasons for the delay were personal and irrelevant.

## Facts

Capt Satvir Singh Gulia, the appellant and an operational creditor, filed an appeal under Section 61(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), against an order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Principal Bench, New Delhi. The appeal was filed with a delay of 170 days in refiling. The appellant sought condonation of the delay, citing reasons such as the advocate's clerk misplacing pages of the appeal, personal difficulty in refiling, engagement in a roka ceremony, preparation for marriage, mother's major surgery, and house shifting. M/s Emaar India Limited, the respondent, opposed the condonation of delay, arguing that the appellant was not vigilant in prosecuting the appeal and that the reasons for the delay were personal and irrelevant.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the delay of 170 days in refiling the appeal should be condoned based on the reasons …

**Ratio:** Condonation of delay requires sufficient cause and diligence. Courts have discretion to

…

**Reasoning:** The court found the reasons provided by the appellant (advocate's clerk misplacing pages,

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of 'sufficient cause' requires a party to demonstrate that

…

**Application:** In this case, the court applied the ratio by finding that the appellant's

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Arun Ba…
- **Appellants:** Satvir Sing…
- **Respondents:** M/s Emaar India…

## Timeline

- **2024-02-02 — Impugned Orde…**: The Impugned Order was passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law…
- **2024-02-20 — Application for…**: The Certified Copy of the…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 61(1) — 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/satvir-singh-gulia-vs-emaar-india-limited-5a95e019