Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Hardik vs Ramdeo R. Agarwal on 8 May, 2026
Author: Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha
Bench: Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. ______ OF 2026
[DIARY NO. 66679 OF 2025]
HARDIK Appellant (s)
VERSUS
RAMDEO R. AGARWAL & ANR. Respondent(s)
O R D E R
1. There is a delay of 37 days in filing this civil appeal. In V.Nagarajan Vs. SKS Ispat and Power Limited and Ors., reported in (2022) 2 SCC 244, this Court held that the period of limitation commences from the date of pronouncement of the order. The relevant portion of the Judgment is as follows :-
“33. The answer to the two issues set out in Section C of the judgement- (i) when will the clock for calculating the limitation period run for proceedings under the IBC; and (ii) is the annexation of a certified copy mandatory for an appeal to the NCLAT against an order passed under the IBC – must be based on a harmonious interpretation of the Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Jayant Kumar Arora Date: 2026.05.16 applicable legal regime, given that 12:51:50 IST Reason: the IBC is a Code in itself and has overriding effect. Sections 61(1) and 2 (2) of the IBC consciously omit the requirement of limitation being computed from when the “order is made available to the aggrieved party”, in contradistinction to Section 421(3) of the Companies Act. Owing to the special nature of the IBC, the aggrieved party is expected to exercise due diligence and apply for a certified copy upon pronouncement of the order it seeks to assail, in consonance with the requirements of Rule 22(2) of the NCLAT Rules.
Section 12(2) of the Limitation Act allows for an exclusion of the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree or order appealed against. It is not open to a person aggrieved by an order under the IBC to await the receipt of a free certified copy under Section 420(3) of the Companies Act 2013 read with Rule 50 of the NCLT and prevent limitation from running. Accepting such a construction will upset the timely framework of the IBC. The litigant has to file its appeal within thirty 3 days, which can be extended up to a period of fifteen days, and no more, upon showing sufficient cause. A sleight of interpretation of procedural rules cannot be used to defeat the substantive objective of a legislation that has an impact on the economic health of a nation.”
2. In view of above, the civil appeal is dismissed on the ground of delay.
3. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, is/are disposed of.
……………………………………………………………………….J. [PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA] …………………………………………………………………...J. [ALOK ARADHE] NEW DELHI;
MAY 08, 2026.
4
ITEM NO.47 COURT NO.6 SECTION XVII-B
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
CIVIL APPEAL Diary No(s). 66679/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 29-08-2025 in CAAT No. 1295/2023 passed by the National Company Law Apellate Tribunal] HARDIK Petitioner(s) VERSUS RAMDEO R. AGARWAL & ANR. Respondent(s) IA No. 32770/2026 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 32771/2026 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING / CURING THE DEFECTS, IA No. 32772/2026 - STAY APPLICATION Date : 08-05-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shreeyash U Lalit, Adv.
Mr. Mahesh Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Aniruddha Purshotham, Adv. Mr. Lalit Belwal, Adv.
Mr. Binod Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Yogendra Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Pratyaksh Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Manisha, Adv.
Ms. Yashica Rawal, Adv.
Ms. Abhilasha Belwal, Adv. Ms. Devika Khanna, Adv.
Mr. Vmz Chambers, AOR For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bharat Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Varun Tyagi, Adv.
Mr. Vishesh Chauhan, Adv.
Ms. Shagun Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Ishan Srivastava, Adv. Ms. Snigdha Jena, Adv.
Mr. Prashant Verna, Adv.
Mr. Sandeep Choudhary, AOR Mr. Prabhat Kumar Chaurasia, AOR Mr. Prabhat Chaurasia, Adv. Mr. Jasdeep Singh Dhillon, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Jamwal, Adv.
Ms. Kenisha Savla, Adv.
5Mr. Aditya Bajaj, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
1. The civil appeal is dismissed on the ground of delay in terms of the signed order.
2. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, is/are disposed of.
(JAYANT KUMAR ARORA) (NIDHI WASON) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (Signed order is placed on the file)