# In the matter of Velamur Varadan Anand Vs. Union Bank of India & Anr. CA (AT) No. 161-2018

> NCLAT judgment dated 2018-05-16. Citation: TCN-2018-NCLAT-00277. The appeal concerns the calculation of the 180-day period for the Corporate Insolvency…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 16 May 2018
- **Citation:** TCN-2018-NCLAT-00277
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/velamur-varadan-anand-vs-union-bank-of-india-anr-ca-a3da5c72

## Summary

### Background

The appeal concerns the calculation of the 180-day period for the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The core issue revolves around whether the period should be counted from the date of admission or from the date the Resolution Professional (RP) gains knowledge of their appointment. The case also considers situations where there is a gap between the knowledge of the RP and the actual date of admission, and whether this gap should be excluded from the calculation. The Adjudicating Authority's order was challenged, leading to this appeal.

## Facts

The case involves an appeal regarding the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The key facts are: 1. The primary issue is how to calculate the 180-day period for CIRP, specifically whether it should be counted from the date of admission or the date the Resolution Professional (RP) gains knowledge. 2. There was a gap of 30 days between the admission of the application on August 16, 2017, and the RP taking charge on September 14, 2017. 3. The Adjudicating Authority passed an order on March 16, 2018, which was challenged in this appeal. 4. The Appellate Tribunal considered a similar issue in the 'Quinn Logistics India Pvt. Ltd.' case. 5. The RP was informed and took over the charge after 30 days of admission.

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the period of 180 days for the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process should be counted …

**Ratio:** The ratio is based on the principle that certain periods can be excluded from the

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that if there is a delay between the admission date and the Resolution

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of the IBC provisions related to the CIRP timeline allows

…

**Application:** In this specific case, the court applied the ratio by directing the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** S.J. Mukhop…; Bansi Lal…
- **Appellants:** Velamur Varadan…
- **Respondents:** Union Bank of…

## Timeline

- **2017-08-16 — Case Adm…**: The case was admitted…
- **2017-09-14 — RP Took C…**: The Resolution Professional took…

---

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/velamur-varadan-anand-vs-union-bank-of-india-anr-ca-a3da5c72