Appeal Filed with Free Copy Within Condonable Period to Be Accepted as NCLT Rules Equate Free Certified and Paid Copies

Case Details: State Bank of India v. India Power Corporation Ltd - [2024] 168 taxmann.com 112 (SC)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI & Manoj Misra, J.
• Tushar Mehta, SG, Madhav Kanoria, Ms Surabhi Khattar, Ms Neha Shivhare, Sriharsh Raj, Advs. & M/S. Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, AOR, for the Petitioner.
• Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv., Anirban Bhattacharya, AOR, Rajeev Chowdhary, Ms Priyanka Bhatt & Pranjit Bhattacharya, Advs. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, the appellant, SBI, instituted an application under section 7 of the IBC against the respondent company, which was rejected by the NCLT on the ground of maintainability. The appellant filed an appeal before the NCLAT and also filed an application for condonation of delay on the ground that the appeal had been lodged with a delay of 3 days beyond the 30-day period prescribed in section 61(2) of the IBC.

A divergence arose between two members of the NCLAT on the issue of delay. The Judicial Member held that the certified copy which was filed by the appellant was a ‘free of cost’ copy and, hence, in the absence of an application for grant of a certified copy, a delay of three days could not be condoned.

On the other hand, the Technical Member held that no distinction could be made between certified copies obtained through fee payment and a free copy, and sufficient cause was shown to condone a delay of three days. Subsequently, divergence was referred to a third Member of the NCLAT, who ruled that a free copy provided under rule 50 of the NCLT Rules could not be treated as a certified copy. The NCLAT dismissed the appeal on delay. Then, an appeal was made before the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court Held

The Supreme Court observed that the provisions of Rule 50 of the NCLT Rules place both free certified copy and certified copy, which is applied for on payment of fees on the same footing.

The Supreme Court held that since both certified copies, which are made available free of cost, and certified copies, which are made available on payment of costs, are treated as certified copies for the purpose of Rule 50, an appeal filed within the condonable period of 15 days was to be condoned.

Therefore, the impugned order of the NCLAT was to be set aside and an appeal was to be restored to the file of the NCLAT.

List of Cases Reviewed

• State Bank of India v. India Power Corporation Ltd. [2024] 164 taxmann.com 362 (NCLAT – Chennai) [Para 23]; reversed
• V Nagarajan v. SKS Ispat and Power Limited (2022) 2 SCC 244 [Para19] distinguished

List of Cases Referred to

• V Nagarajan v. SKS Ispat and Power Limited & Ors (2022) 2 SCC 244 (para 16).