NCLAT Holds Appeal Delay Deemed Condoned Due To Registry Error, Refuses To Recall Insolvency Admission

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Delhi held that a three-day delay in filing an insolvency appeal stood deemed to have been condoned due to a registry error, and on that basis refused to recall its earlier order admitting insolvency proceedings.

A coram comprising Judicial Member Justice Yogesh Khanna and Technical Member Ajai Das Mehrotra, passed the order on December 19, 2025. It dismissed a recall application filed by Akshay Techforge Private Limited and upheld its May 23, 2025 judgment admitting a Section 7 insolvency CIRP plea against the company.

The National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai on February 9, 2023 had dismissed an insolvency plea filed by Advantagesai Projects Private Limited against the company.It treated the transaction between the parties as a sale-purchase arrangement rather than a loan.

On appeal, the appellate tribunal, however, reversed that finding. It held that the real intention of the parties was not the sale of land but repayment of a loan. The tribunal noted that the funds were advanced to clear the corporate debtor's bank dues and that the property was meant only as security.

Following this reversal, Akshay Techforge filed a recall application. The company argued that the appeal itself was not maintainable as it had been filed beyond the 30-day limitation period under Section 61(2) of the Code.Since no formal application seeking condonation of delay had been listed or allowed, it contended that the appellate tribunal lacked jurisdiction recall the tribunal's order.

Advantagesai opposed the plea, pointing out that the delay was only three days after excluding the time taken to obtain a certified copy of the NCLT order. It submitted that although a delay-condonation application had initially been prepared and served, the NCLAT Registry had directed its removal after wrongly recording that there was no delay in filing the appeal.

It also stressed that Akshay Techforge never raised any objection on limitation when the appeal was originally heard.Accepting this explanation, the appellate tribunal held that there was a “genuine mistaken belief due to inadvertent wrong reporting of the Registry” that the appeal was filed within time. It noted that the delay, if any, fell squarely within the statutory grace period.

“We are of the view the delay, if any, was within the grace/condonable period of 15 days, beyond the statutory period of 30 days,” the coram observed.

Rejecting the argument that delay cannot be condoned without a written application, the tribunal drew on Supreme Court precedents. It noted that filing an application in writing is not always mandatory before relief can be granted in every case.

The NCLAT saw the recall petition as basically an attempt to re-litigate the appeal de novo. It held that the earlier judgment had no jurisdictional defect and dismissed the application accordingly.

Click Here To Read/Download Order