Limitation under section 458A does not revive a debt already time-barred before winding up begins; proof of debt is also required.

Section 458A of the Companies Act, 1956 excludes only the period from commencement of winding up to the winding up order and one year thereafter, so it cannot revive a debt already barred before winding up began. The claimed liability here arose from an old ledger entry and the ordinary limitation period had expired before the winding up process, making the recovery claim time-barred. The debt was also not proved: the record lacked supporting vouchers, invoices, purchase orders, or reliable evidence that the books were kept in the regular course of business, and there was no dependable acknowledgment by the respondent. The liquidator's claim therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the application for recovery by the Official Liquidator was barred by limitation under the Companies Act, 1956. (ii) Whether the applicant proved the alleged debt and was entitled to recover the claimed amount from the respondent.

Issue (i): Whether the application for recovery by the Official Liquidator was barred by limitation under the Companies Act, 1956.

Analysis: The limitation plea was examined in the light of section 458A of the Companies Act, 1956, which excludes only the period from commencement of winding up proceedings to the winding up order and one year thereafter. The claimed debt arose from a 1989 entry, and the ordinary period for recovery had already expired before the winding up proceedings commenced. The exclusion under section 458A could not revive a claim that was already time-barred, nor could time spent before the BIFR be added beyond the statutory exclusion.

Conclusion: The application was barred by time and the finding was against the applicant.

Issue (ii): Whether the applicant proved the alleged debt and was entitled to recover the claimed amount from the respondent.

Analysis: The claim rested mainly on a ledger entry and the statement of affairs, without supporting vouchers, purchase orders, invoices, or examination of the person who maintained the books. The evidence did not establish that the books were kept in the regular course of business, and there was no reliable acknowledgment of debt by the respondent. On the record, the alleged liability was not proved.

Conclusion: The applicant failed to prove the debt and was not entitled to recover the claimed amount.

Final Conclusion: The application for recovery was not maintainable in limitation and the alleged liability was not substantiated by acceptable evidence, so the claim could not be enforced.

Ratio Decidendi: Section 458A of the Companies Act, 1956 excludes only the statutory period specified therein and cannot revive a claim that was already barred before winding up commenced; a recovery claim by a liquidator must also be proved by reliable evidence of debt.

---