Skip to content

Insolvency and Bankruptcy - Law and Practice · Adjudication and Appeals for Corporate Persons

Limitation under Section 238A IBC and Condonation of Delay

Updated 11 October 2026 · Fact-checked

Section 238A makes the Limitation Act, 1963 apply, as far as may be, to proceedings and appeals before the NCLT, NCLAT, DRT and DRAT under the Code. You check the time limit, count the period, then see whether delay can be condoned. For NCLAT appeals, condonation is capped at 15 days beyond 30.

Understand Limitation under Section 238A and Condonation of Delay

The Code sets its own time limits for many steps, such as the 180-day period for the resolution process. But it does not set a time limit for filing an application to start a process. Section 238A fills that gap. It says the Limitation Act, 1963 applies as far as may be to proceedings or appeals before the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT, or DRT for individuals and firms), the NCLAT, the DRT and the DRAT.

The words "as far as may be" matter. The Act is not applied blindly. It applies only to the extent it fits the scheme of the Code. Where the Code has its own specific time rule, that rule governs. Section 238A was inserted with effect from 6 June 2018.

Two kinds of delay arise. The first is delay in filing an application, for example a Section 7 application filed late after default. Here the Limitation Act supplies the period and its rules on extension. The second is delay in filing an appeal. Section 61(2) gives 30 days to appeal to the NCLAT. The proviso lets the NCLAT allow a later filing if there was sufficient cause, but the extra time cannot exceed 15 days. So the outer limit for an appeal under Section 61 is 45 days.

The Code also has a separate power in Section 198. If the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India does not perform an act within the period specified in the Code, the relevant Adjudicating Authority may, for reasons recorded in writing, condone the delay. This applies to delay by the Board, not delay by an applicant or appellant.

Finally, Sections 60(6) and 179(3) deal with a different point. When a moratorium is in force, the period of the moratorium is excluded in computing limitation for suits or applications by or against the debtor. Do not confuse this with Section 238A.

Key rules to remember

Section 238A rule
Limitation Act, 1963 applies "as far as may be" to proceedings/appeals before NCLT, NCLAT, DRT, DRAT
Applies to proceedings and appeals, not only to appeals. It is not an automatic or unlimited import.
Appeal period under Section 61(2)
Appeal to NCLAT within 30 days
Counted as the Code provides. Check the date of the order and the date of filing.
Condonation proviso to Section 61(2)
Sufficient cause + extra period not exceeding 15 days
Outer limit is 30 + 15 = 45 days. NCLAT cannot condone beyond that under this proviso.
Section 198
Board fails to act within the Code's period → Adjudicating Authority may condone delay, reasons in writing
Concerns delay by the Board only.
Moratorium exclusion
Section 60(6) (corporate debtor); Section 179(3) (individual debtor): moratorium period excluded in computing limitation
Applies to suits or applications by or against the debtor for which a moratorium order has been made.
Section 7 timing rules
Adjudicating Authority ascertains default within 14 days; rectify defects within 7 days of notice; communicate order within 7 days
These are Code timelines. They are different from the limitation period for filing the application.

How to solve Limitation under Section 238A and Condonation of Delay questions

Use this method for any question on limitation or delay under the Code. Keep the answer in three parts: provision, analysis of facts, conclusion.

  1. 1Identify the forum and the proceeding. Is it an application before the NCLT or DRT, or an appeal to the NCLAT or DRAT?
  2. 2State Section 238A: the Limitation Act, 1963 applies as far as may be to such proceedings and appeals.
  3. 3Check whether the Code gives its own time limit for the step. For an NCLAT appeal, Section 61(2) gives 30 days. If the Code is specific, apply it first.
  4. 4List the dates given: date of default or cause of action, date of order, date of filing. Compute the number of days carefully.
  5. 5If the filing is late, test for condonation. For an appeal, ask whether there was sufficient cause and whether the delay beyond 30 days is within 15 days.
  6. 6Check for any moratorium period that must be excluded under Section 60(6) or Section 179(3).
  7. 7Conclude clearly: maintainable or time-barred, with the reason. Add a practical point, such as filing an application for condonation with an affidavit stating the cause.

Quickest way: Three-question check for limitation problems

When to use it: Use when the question gives dates and asks whether the application or appeal is in time.

  1. Q1: Application or appeal? Application: Limitation Act via Section 238A. Appeal to NCLAT: 30 days under Section 61(2).
  2. Q2: Is it late? Count days from the order date. If beyond 30 days, check whether it is within 45 days.
  3. Q3: Is there sufficient cause? Within 45 days with sufficient cause: can be condoned. Beyond 45 days: cannot be condoned under the Section 61 proviso.
  4. Write the provision, the day count and the conclusion in that order.

Common mistakes in Limitation under Section 238A and Condonation of Delay

  • Saying the NCLAT can condone any delay if the cause is good.

    Students remember "sufficient cause" and forget the cap.

    Fix: Always add: the extra period shall not exceed 15 days, so the outer limit is 45 days.

  • Saying the Limitation Act applies in full to the Code.

    Students drop the words "as far as may be".

    Fix: Quote the phrase. The Act applies only to the extent it suits the Code and does not override the Code's specific time rules.

  • Confusing Section 238A with the moratorium exclusion in Section 60(6).

    Both deal with limitation, so they blur together.

    Fix: Section 238A brings in the Limitation Act. Section 60(6) (and 179(3) for individuals) excludes the moratorium period when computing limitation for suits or applications by or against the debtor.

  • Applying Section 198 to a late appeal by a creditor.

    The heading says "Condonation of delay", so students assume it covers everyone.

    Fix: Section 198 applies where the Board does not perform an act within the period in the Code. Appeals are governed by Section 61(2) and its proviso.

  • Treating the 14-day and 7-day periods in Section 7 as limitation periods.

    They are time limits in the same section, so they look similar.

    Fix: Those are procedural timelines for the Adjudicating Authority and applicant after filing. Limitation for filing the application comes through Section 238A.

  • Naming cases or article numbers from memory without certainty.

    Students try to add weight to the answer.

    Fix: Use cases only if you know the name and holding exactly. A clear statement of the provision and the facts scores better than a doubtful citation.

Worked examples

Example 1

An order of the NCLT admitting a Section 7 application was passed on 1 March. Sharma Textiles Ltd, the corporate debtor, files an appeal before the NCLAT on 20 April, explaining that its directors were abroad. Advise whether the appeal can be entertained.

Show the solution
  1. Provision: Section 61(1) allows any person aggrieved by an Adjudicating Authority order to appeal to the NCLAT. Section 61(2) requires filing within 30 days. Section 238A applies the Limitation Act, 1963 as far as may be to appeals before the NCLAT.
  2. Facts: order on 1 March. Counting 30 days from 1 March in a non-leap sense, the last day is 31 March, treating the day of the order as excluded in line with the Limitation Act. Filing on 20 April is 50 days after 1 March (30 days in March after the 1st, plus 20 in April).
  3. Condonation: the proviso allows the NCLAT to entertain a late appeal for sufficient cause, but the extra period cannot exceed 15 days beyond the 30 days. The outer limit is therefore 45 days from the order, which is 15 April.
  4. Application: 20 April is beyond 15 April. The delay beyond 30 days is 20 days, which exceeds the 15-day cap.
  5. Conclusion: even if the absence abroad were accepted as sufficient cause, the NCLAT cannot condone the delay under the proviso.

Answer: The appeal is time-barred. The 30 days under Section 61(2) ended on 31 March, and the condonable window of 15 more days ended on 15 April. The delay of 20 days beyond the 30 days cannot be condoned, so the NCLAT cannot entertain the appeal.

Example 2

Kaveri Steels Ltd files an appeal before the NCLAT 41 days after the date of the order it challenges. It states that its authorised signatory was hospitalised for three weeks. Examine whether the appeal can be admitted.

Show the solution
  1. Provision: Section 61(2) gives 30 days to appeal. The proviso lets the NCLAT allow filing after 30 days if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause, but the extra period shall not exceed 15 days. Section 238A makes the Limitation Act, 1963 apply as far as may be.
  2. Count: the appeal is filed on day 41. The delay beyond 30 days is 41 − 30 = 11 days.
  3. Test the cap: 11 days is within the 15-day limit. The appeal is within the outer limit of 45 days.
  4. Test the cause: hospitalisation of the person authorised to sign, for three weeks, covering the period of delay, is a reasonable explanation. The company should file an application for condonation supported by an affidavit and medical records.
  5. Conclusion: the NCLAT has power to condone, and a genuine and documented cause makes condonation likely. Whether it does so is a matter of its satisfaction.

Answer: The appeal is within the 45-day outer limit, since the delay beyond 30 days is 11 days, less than 15. The NCLAT can condone the delay if it is satisfied that the hospitalisation is a sufficient cause, so the appeal can be admitted on that basis.

Exam tips

  • Write the 30 + 15 = 45 days rule in every answer on appeals. Examiners look for the cap.
  • Quote "as far as may be" when you state Section 238A. It shows you know the Act is not applied mechanically.
  • In case-based questions, make a small date table in your answer: order date, day 30, day 45, filing date. Then conclude.
  • Keep Section 238A (limitation for filing), Section 61(2) (appeal period), Section 198 (Board's delay) and Sections 60(6)/179(3) (moratorium exclusion) in separate boxes in your mind.
  • Cite a case only if you are certain of its name and holding. Otherwise rely on the text of the provision.

Practice questions from Adjudication and Appeals for Corporate Persons

Limitation under Section 238A and Condonation of Delay in other exams

The same ground in other exams, if you are preparing for more than one or want another angle on it.

Limitation under Section 238A and Condonation of Delay: frequently asked questions

Does the Limitation Act apply to the IBC?

Yes, through Section 238A. The Limitation Act, 1963 applies as far as may be to proceedings or appeals before the NCLT, NCLAT, DRT and DRAT. It applies only to the extent it fits the Code.

What is the time limit to appeal to the NCLAT under Section 61?

An appeal must be filed within 30 days. The NCLAT may allow filing after that if there was sufficient cause, but the extra period cannot exceed 15 days.

Can the NCLAT condone a delay of more than 15 days beyond the 30 days?

No, not under the proviso to Section 61(2). The proviso states that the period allowed shall not exceed 15 days. That makes 45 days the outer limit.

What does Section 198 of the IBC say about condonation of delay?

It applies where the Board does not perform an act within the period specified in the Code. The relevant Adjudicating Authority may then condone the delay, for reasons recorded in writing.

Is the period of moratorium counted for limitation?

No. Section 60(6) excludes the moratorium period in computing limitation for suits or applications by or against a corporate debtor. Section 179(3) gives the same rule for individual debtors.