# In the matter of Sanjay Pandurang Kalate Vs. Vistra ITCL (India) Limited and Others

> SC judgment dated 2023-12-04. Citation: TCN-2023-SC-00005. The appeals arise from a judgment of the NCLAT, which dismissed the appeal against the order of the…

- **Court:** SC
- **Order date:** 4 Dec 2023
- **Citation:** TCN-2023-SC-00005
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/supreme-court-of-india/sanjay-pandurang-kalate-vs-vistra-itcl-67cd09ed

## Summary

### Background

The appeals arise from a judgment of the NCLAT, which dismissed the appeal against the order of the NCLT, Mumbai, on the ground of limitation. The case involves an application under Section 7 of the IBC filed by Vistra ITCL (India) Limited against Evirant Developers Private Limited, the Corporate Debtor. The appellant, a former director of the Corporate Debtor, alleges collusion in the Section 7 application. The NCLT dismissed the appellant's interlocutory application, and the NCLAT upheld this dismissal based on limitation, relying on the decision in V Nagarajan v. SKS Ispat.

## Facts

Vistra ITCL (India) Limited filed an application under Section 7 of the IBC against Evirant Developers Private Limited. Sanjay Pandurang Kalate, a former director of Evirant Developers, filed an interlocutory application alleging that the Section 7 application was based on collusion. The NCLT heard the application on 17 May 2023 but did not pronounce an order. The order was uploaded on 30 May 2023, bearing the date of 17 May 2023. The appellant applied for a certified copy on 30 May 2023 and received it on 1 June 2023. The appeal was e-filed before the NCLAT on 10 July 2023. The NCLAT dismissed the appeal as time-barred, concluding that the limitation period began on 17 May 2023 and that the appeal was filed beyond the permissible 45-day limit. The appellant contended

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the NCLAT was correct in …

**Ratio:** The limitation period for filing an appeal against an order of the NCLT under the IBC is

…

**Reasoning:** The Supreme Court reasoned that the NCLT Rules, 2016, make a clear distinction between

…

**Interpretation:** The Supreme Court interpreted Section 61 of the IBC and the NCLT Rules, 2016,

…

**Application:** In this case, the Supreme Court applied the ratio and reasoning to the facts

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Dr Dhananjaya Y…; J.B. PARD…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Sanjay Pandurang…
- **Respondents:** Evirant Developers…; Vistra ITCL…

## Timeline

- **2023-05-17 — Hearing of Interlocutory…**: The appellant's interlocutory application was heard by the NCLT, but no order was…
- **2023-05-19 — CIRP Init…**: The NCLT allowed respondent 1's Section 7 application and initiated CIRP against the…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 62 — Appeal to Supreme Court](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-62)

---

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/supreme-court-of-india/sanjay-pandurang-kalate-vs-vistra-itcl-67cd09ed