Authority: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Chennai Bench

Order Date: 25.09.2026

Case Overview

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Chennai Bench, presided over by Justice N. Seshasayee (Member Judicial) and Jatindranath Swain (Member Technical), heard interlocutory applications (IA No. 105/2026 and IA No. 189/2026) seeking condonation of a 14-day delay in filing two separate appeals. The appellants, Lulu India Shopping Mall Private Limited and Lulu IT Infrabuild Pvt. Ltd. (sister companies), are operational creditors challenging the National Company Law Tribunal's (NCLT) order dated 20.11.2025. That order had approved the resolution plan submitted by Nalwa Steel and Power Limited for the corporate debtor, Katerra India Private Limited.

The appellants e-filed their appeals on 03.01.2026. The last date for filing the appeal within the mandatory 30-day period was 20.12.2025. The upper limit of the condonable period under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) was 04.01.2026. The appellants argued that the delay of 14 days (from 20.12.2025 to 03.01.2026) was due to the Christmas and New Year festival season, which resulted in limited key personnel being available to prepare the appeals. Additional reasons included the time taken by their advocate to seek critical information, execute affidavits, and obtain multiple levels of internal approvals. They pleaded that the delay was neither wanton nor deliberate.

The respondents (Katerra India Private Limited) raised several procedural objections against condoning the delay. They contended that the verification affidavit accompanying the appeal was notarized in Ernakulam while the executant was in Lucknow. They also noted that the appeals were not accompanied by stamp paper of requisite value at the time of initial filing on 03.01.2026, and that the verification affidavits were dated 05.01.2026 (after the filing date). Furthermore, they argued that the appeals were incompetent as they were not filed with a certified copy of the impugned order, as required by Rule 22(2) of the NCLAT Rules. The respondents relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Angelwoods Apartment Allottees Association v. M. Lalitha & Anr. [(2026) SCC Online SC 846] to argue that an appeal not satisfying essential requirements at institution cannot be made valid by subsequently curing defects.

Final Outcome

The NCLAT condoned the 14-day delay in filing the appeals. The tribunal held that the procedural defects raised by the respondents were curable and not fatal. It distinguished the Angelwoods case, noting that the appellants in this case had filed applications for exemption from filing a certified copy (IA No.107/2026 and IA No.186/2026) during the re-filing process, which was completed by 12.01.2026—a mere 8 days after the condonable period ended. The tribunal found that the defect regarding the stamp paper (dated 05.01.2026 for an appeal filed on 03.01.2026) was rectified when the appeal was re-filed on 12.01.2026 after the registry raised the defect. On the issue of notarization, the tribunal held that it was a procedural defect and a "handmaid of justice," citing the Supreme Court in Uday Shankar Triyar V. Ram Kalewar Prasad Singh & Anr. The appellants were given liberty to file a fresh affidavit with valid notarization. The appeals were listed for further hearing on 07.10.2026.

Topics: Insolvency Appeal, Condonation of Delay, Procedural Compliance