Delay in Obtaining Documents Not Sufficient Reason: NCLAT Refuses to Condone 248 days Delay in Recall Plea [Read Order]
NCLAT rejects recall plea by Raju Rangadhamaiah, holding that delay of 248 days citing document collection is not a sufficient reason to condone
Condone 248 days Delay in Recall Plea
Condone 248 days Delay in Recall Plea
The Chennai Bench of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) refused to condone a delay of 248 days in filing a recall application by Mr. Raju Rangadhamaiah and his wife, Smt. M. Jagadamba, after observing that the explanation of delay in obtaining documents was not a sufficient reason.
The appellants had earlier filed a company appeal against Vinyas Constructions Private Limited and others. On 01.02.2023, after a prolonged hearing, the appellants themselves requested permission to withdraw the appeal with liberty to pursue remedies available under law, which the tribunal allowed.
Later, they filed a recall application along with a condonation application seeking to set aside the withdrawal order, citing that they needed time to obtain documents, which caused the delay.
The two-member bench comprising Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma (Judicial Member) and Jatindranath Swain (Technical Member) examined the applications. The tribunal observed that the withdrawal order of 01.02.2023 was passed on the appellants’ own request and did not suffer from any error that could justify recall.
The tribunal pointed out that the reason given for the delay was not acceptable since the appellants were already pursuing the matter and could not justify nearly eight months of delay merely on the ground of collecting documents.
Based on these findings, the tribunal rejected the condonation of delay application and consequently dismissed the recall application as unsustainable.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
