.webp)
The Supreme Court has restored an appeal that was filed one day beyond the maximum 45-day period under Section 61(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), after finding that the delay occurred because of technical problems in the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) e-filing system. The judgment was delivered on September 10, 2026.
Background
The dispute arose from the approval of a resolution plan submitted by Ashdan Properties Private Limited concerning Rolta India Limited. The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai, approved the plan on December 15, 2025.
The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II challenged that order before the NCLAT. Counsel attempted to e-file the appeal on January 28 and again on January 29, 2026, but technical problems, including failure of OTP delivery and backend issues, prevented the filing. The appeal was ultimately e-filed on January 30, one day beyond the 30-day limitation period plus the additional 15 days permitted under Section 61(2).
The NCLAT rejected the application for condonation of delay and dismissed the appeal as time-barred on May 21, 2026.
A Bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sheel Nagu noted that the statutory limitation under the IBC has to be strictly followed. However, the Court found that the facts in this case were materially different because the delay was attributable to the NCLAT's own e-filing system rather than negligence or inaction by the appellant.
The Court observed:
"When the system of the court/tribunal fails to receive the papers, which are sought to be presented bona fide and within the prescribed time, the litigant cannot be rendered remediless on the specious ground that the court/tribunal has no power to condone the delay."
The Court held that the principle actus curiae neminem gravabit meaning that an act of the court should not prejudice a litigant could be applied in these circumstances. It said the date of the first bona fide attempt to e-file could be treated as the date of presentation.
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the NCLAT's May 21, 2026 order. It restored the NCLAT appeal and the delay application for reconsideration. The NCLAT was directed to examine whether sufficient cause existed and dispose of the application at the earliest. If the application was decided in favour of the appellant, the appeal would be registered and decided according to law.
The parties were directed to bear their own costs.
Case Details:
Case Title: Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II v. Ms. Mamta Binani & Ors.
Case Number: Civil Appeal No. 12962 of 2026 (arising out of Diary No. 42931 of 2026)
Judges: Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sheel Nagu
Decision Date: September 10, 2026
-300x169.webp)
-300x169.webp)
