Limitation for official liquidator claims under the Companies Act may be extended by written acknowledgment and winding-up provisions.

A claim by an official liquidator under section 446(2)(b) of the Companies Act, 1956 for recovery of a loan is governed by article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 as a residuary provision, not as an ordinary money suit. A written acknowledgment of liability, including a letter admitting the dues, keeps the debt alive for limitation purposes, and section 458A of the Companies Act, 1956 extends the period available to the official liquidator after a winding-up order. On those facts, the loan claim was within limitation and maintainable, and the application was allowed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the claim under section 446(2)(b) of the Companies Act, 1956 for recovery of the loan amount was barred by limitation.

Analysis: The respondent's signatures on the loan documents, promissory notes and the written letter acknowledging the dues established the borrowing and the subsisting liability. The letter constituted an acknowledgment in writing within the meaning of the law of limitation and kept the debt alive. Since the claim was a special claim under the Companies Act and not an ordinary suit for money, article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applied as the residuary provision. In computing time, section 458A of the Companies Act, 1956 extended the period available to the official liquidator after the winding-up order.

Conclusion: The claim was within limitation and was maintainable; the application was rightly allowed in favour of the official liquidator.

Ratio Decidendi: A claim by the official liquidator under section 446(2)(b) of the Companies Act, 1956 is governed by article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and a written acknowledgment of liability, read with section 458A of the Companies Act, 1956, can keep the debt alive and render the claim timely.

---