Skip to content

CS Professional · Drafting, Pleadings and Appearances · Applications, Petitions and Appeals under Companies Act, 2013

Kaveri Foods Ltd files a Supreme Court appeal 130 days after receiving an adverse NCLAT order. It shows that its officer was hospitalised throughout. Which is the correct legal position under section 423?

The appeal is out of time. The Act allows sixty days from receipt plus at most a further sixty days for sufficient cause, giving 120 days. Filing at 130 days exceeds that ceiling, so the proved illness cannot cure the delay.

  1. AThe Supreme Court can condone the delay up to 130 days as sufficient cause is proved
  2. BThe appeal is beyond the maximum condonable period of sixty days plus a further sixty days, so it cannot be admitted as in timeCorrect
  3. CThe appeal is valid because the limit runs only from the date of the order's signing
  4. DThe appeal should be treated as a review petition before NCLAT

Explanation

The primary period is sixty days and the Supreme Court may allow a further period not exceeding sixty days, a total of 120 days from receipt. At 130 days the appeal exceeds this outer limit, so sufficient cause does not help. Option one ignores the cap.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Applications, Petitions and Appeals under Companies Act, 2013 shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Applications, Petitions and Appeals under Companies Act, 2013Free diagnostic mock

More Applications, Petitions and Appeals under Companies Act, 2013 questions