Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: ss. 10, 61, 238A – Proceedings or appeals before the adjudicating Authority, appellate tribunal etc – Application of Limitation Act – On facts, application u/s. 10 by Corporate Debtor for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process – Successively five Form G notified – Resolution applicant-KIAL submitted Resolution Plan (RP) within the stipulated time and resolution applicant-Kalpraj submitted plan after the stipulated time – Objection raised by KIAL – Subsequently on direction by Committee of Creditors (CoC), submission of revised plan by KIAL and Kalpraj – Thereafter, approval of revised plan submitted by Kalpraj – KIAL challenged the approval of Kalpraj’s Resolution Plan before NCLT – Plan of Kalpraj approved by NCLT – Thereafter, KIAL filed Writ Petition before the High Court which was dismissed on the ground of alternate remedy – KIAL then filed appeal before NCLAT which was allowed, rejecting Kalpraj submission that appeal were filed beyond the limitation period prescribed in IBC – On appeal, held: Provisions of s. 14 of the Limitation Act are available to KIAL – Applying the principles underlying s. 14, KAIL entitled to exclusion of the period during which it was bona fide prosecuting a remedy before the High Court in good faith and with due diligence, thus, the appeals filed before NCLAT within the limitation – Though an alternate remedy was available to it, it was approaching the High Court since the issue with regard to functioning of NCLT also fell for consideration – High Court dismissed the writ petition relegating KIAL to an alternate remedy available in law – High Court could have exercised extra-ordinary jurisdiction u/Art. 226 inasmuch as, the grievance was regarding procedure followed by NCLT to be in breach of principles of natural justice – Limitation Act, 1963 – s. 29(2) – Constitution of India – Art. 226.