# In the matter of State Bank of India vs. Anish Niranjan Nanavaty & Anr.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2024-03-22. Citation: TCN-2024-NCLAT-00560. The State Bank of India (SBI) filed a Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 150 of 2024…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 22 Mar 2024
- **Citation:** TCN-2024-NCLAT-00560
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/state-bank-of-india-vs-anish-niranjan-nanavaty-anr-70e9110d

## Summary

### Background

The State Bank of India (SBI) filed a Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 150 of 2024 challenging an order passed by the NCLT. SBI also filed I.A. No. 478 of 2024 seeking condonation of a delay of 18 days in filing the appeal. The NCLT order, passed in I.A. No. 127 of 2022, was related to convening a Committee of Creditors (CoC) meeting. SBI contended that the impugned order was not available until 12.12.2023, and they made an attempt to obtain a certified copy on 20.11.2023 but were informed that SBI was not a party to the I.A. and could not apply for a certified copy. Bank of Baroda, the respondent, argued that the order was pronounced in the presence of SBI's counsel on 10.11.2023, and the delay was not condonable.

## Facts

1. State Bank of India (SBI) filed a Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 150 of 2024 against an order passed by the NCLT.
2. SBI also filed I.A. No. 478 of 2024 seeking condonation of a delay of 18 days in filing the appeal.
3. The impugned order was passed on 10.11.2023 in I.A. No. 127 of 2022.
4. SBI claimed the impugned order was not available prior to 12.12.2023 and was uploaded on the NCLT website on 12.12.2023.
5. SBI's advocate attempted to file a precipe for a certified copy on 20.11.2023 but was informed SBI was not a party to I.A. No. 127 of 2022 and could not apply for a certified copy.
6. Bank of Baroda, the respondent, filed an affidavit stating I.A. No. 127 of 2022 was heard on 10.11.2023 in the presence of SBI's counsel, and the order was pronounced in open

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the delay of 18 days in …

**Ratio:** The limitation period commences from the date the order is pronounced, and the time taken

…

**Reasoning:** The court relied on the Supreme Court's judgment in V. Nagarajan Vs. SKS Ispat and Power

…

**Interpretation:** Section 12 of the Limitation Act and Rule 50 of the NCLT Rules are interpreted

…

**Application:** In this case, the order was pronounced on 10.11.2023, and the appellant did not

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Barun M…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** State Bank of…
- **Respondents:** Anish Niranjan…

## Timeline

- **2023-11-10 — Order Passed…**: The NCLT passed an order…
- **2023-11-20 — Attempt to Obtain…**: SBI's advocate attempted to file a precipe for a certified copy but was informed SBI was…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 61(2) — 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/state-bank-of-india-vs-anish-niranjan-nanavaty-anr-70e9110d