(Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ.)
Thrani Industries Ltd. _______________________________ Appellant;
v.
KNK Ship Management ____________________________ Respondent.
Civil Appeal No. ……………./2026 @ D. No. 61278/2025§, decided on May 25, 2026
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. This appeal, under Section 62 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 20161, is at the instance of Thrani Industries Ltd. It is aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 11th September, 20252 passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench at New Delhi3 in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 2149 of 2024.
2. The appeal was presented on 25th October 2025, i.e., within the prescribed period of limitation. It was, however, marked defective. The defects were not cured within the period prescribed by the Supreme Court Rules, 2013. After curing the defects, the appeal was re-filed. In the process, there has been a delay of 166 days. An application has been filed for condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal.
3. In this regard, we have perused the said application seeking condonation of re-filing delay. The relevant paragraphs from such application seeking to explain why the delay occurred read as follows:
3. That there is a delay of 166 days in refiling the present Appeal caused to non-availability of typed pages as pointed out in defects. Furthermore, the authorised representative of the Appellant company was undergoing treatment, and was thus rendered unable to coordinate and communicate with his counsel for several weeks.
4. That the delay in filing the Appeal is neither intentional nor wilful but due to the good and sufficient reasons shown herein above. It is requested that the present Application be allowed and the delay in filing is condoned so that the matter can be adjudicated upon on its merits as would be in the interest of justice.
4. Absolutely no cause, not to speak of sufficient cause, has been shown for condonation of re-filing delay. It is only a lame excuse that is furnished by the appellant.
5. Hence, the application seeking condonation of delay stands dismissed. Consequently, the appeal shall also stand dismissed.
———
1 IBC
2 impugned order
3 NCLAT
§ 2026 INSC 624
