IBC appeal to the NCLAT:
how long do you have?
Last reviewed: 2026-08-19 · quoted from the India Code bare-Act PDF
Not a Limitation Act Schedule article. This deadline is fixed by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Schedule to the Limitation Act, 1963 does not govern it — the period, its starting point, and whether any delay can be condoned all come from the statute's own text, quoted below.
The statute fixes no express trigger in s.61(2); the appeal lies against 'the order of the Adjudicating Authority' (s.61(1)). The Supreme Court (V. Nagarajan, 2021) holds time runs from pronouncement of the NCLT order, not from receipt of a certified copy — though s.12(2) Limitation Act copy-time exclusion applies if a copy was applied for.
The statutory text
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, s.61(2) — NOT a Limitation Act Schedule articleProvision: s.61(2): 'Every appeal under sub-section (1) shall be filed within thirty days before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal: Provided that the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal may allow an appeal to be filed after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal but such period shall not exceed fifteen days.'
Period: Thirty days; condonable for sufficient cause by a further period 'not [to] exceed fifteen days' — a hard 45-day outer cap.
Time from which period begins to run: The statute fixes no express trigger in s.61(2); the appeal lies against 'the order of the Adjudicating Authority' (s.61(1)). The Supreme Court (V. Nagarajan, 2021) holds time runs from pronouncement of the NCLT order, not from receipt of a certified copy — though s.12(2) Limitation Act copy-time exclusion applies if a copy was applied for.
Open the bare Act on India Code →
In plain English
Appeals from NCLT insolvency orders to the NCLAT must be filed within thirty days, extendable by a maximum of fifteen days on sufficient cause — beyond 45 days the NCLAT has no jurisdiction at all. The clock starts on pronouncement of the order, so parties must apply for the certified copy immediately to preserve the s.12(2) exclusion.
Where this comes up
- Operational creditor appealing rejection of a s.9 application
- Promoter challenging admission of the company into CIRP
- Appeal against approval of a resolution plan on s.61(3) grounds
What can reset or extend this period
General rules for deadlines that live outside the Limitation Act Schedule. The specifics for this deadline are in the quoted statutory text above.
The Limitation Act applies only as far as this statute allows
Under the s.29(2) scheme, a special law's own limitation regime governs, and it can exclude s.5 condonation expressly or by its scheme — the Arbitration Act's 'but not thereafter' and the IBC's fifteen-day cap operate as hard ceilings, while the Consumer Protection Act builds its own condonation into s.69(2). Read the quoted statutory text above; the Schedule's rules do not simply carry over.
Frequently asked
Can NCLAT condone delay beyond 45 days?
No. The proviso caps condonation at fifteen days beyond the thirty — 'such period shall not exceed fifteen days'. The 45th day is an absolute wall.
Does time wait until I receive the order copy?
No — per the Supreme Court, limitation runs from pronouncement; only the time actually requisite for obtaining a certified copy (after you apply for it) is excluded under s.12(2) of the Limitation Act.
This is a reference to the statutory text, not advice on a live matter. Limitation is brutally fact-sensitive — when the cause of action accrued, whether an acknowledgment or part-payment reset the clock, and which exclusions under ss.4-15 apply all turn on your specific facts. This page is a reference to the statutory text, not advice on a live matter, and it does not create an advocate-client relationship. A single day's error can be fatal to a claim: s.5 condonation never applies to suits, and several special-statute deadlines (Arbitration s.34(3), IBC s.61(2)) are hard ceilings no court can extend. Verify every period against the bare Act as currently amended and against current case law, and take advice on your own facts before acting. Provisions here were reviewed on 19 August 2026.