Appellant (KIAL) preferred a writ petition before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay soon after pronouncement of judgment by NCLT, which was withdrawn with the liberty to file an appeal. Thereafter, an appeal was filed before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal beyond 45 days (including 15 days of extension) under Section 61 of IBC, along with an application under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 which was dismissed by NCLAT. Held, the conditions which enable a party to invoke the provisions of S.14 of the Limitation Act were available to KIAL and if the period during which KIAL was bona fide prosecuting the writ petition before the High Court and that too with due diligence, is excluded applying the principles underlying S.14 of the limitation Act, the appeals filed before NCLAT would be very much within the limitation. Though strictly, the provisions of Section 14 of the Limitation Act would not be applicable to the proceedings before a quasi-judicial tribunal, however, the principles underlying the same would be applicable i.e. the proper approach will have to be advancing the cause of justice, rather than to abort the proceedings. Para 65.
Kalparaj Dharamshi and another V. Kotak Investment advisors limited and another (2021) 10 SCC 401