Limitation for company recovery claims requires exclusion under winding-up rules, but an unproved late acknowledgment cannot extend time.

A company application for recovery under section 446(2)(b) of the Companies Act, 1956 had to be tested against the relevant Limitation Act article for a promissory note claim, with the exclusion period under section 458A added. The court held that, even after excluding the winding-up period and one year thereafter, the application filed on 30-10-2000 was still well beyond limitation. The alleged acknowledgment did not extend time because it was outside the limitation period and was not proved in accordance with law. The application was therefore barred by time.

---

---

Issues: Whether the company application for recovery was barred by limitation.

Analysis: The application was filed under section 446(2)(b) of the Companies Act, 1956 read with rule 9 of the Company (Court) Rules, 1959. The claim arose from a promissory note executed on 20-7-1989. For determining limitation, the relevant article under the Limitation Act, 1963 had to be applied to the nature of the claim, and the period excluded under section 458A of the Companies Act, 1956 had to be added. The Court found that even after excluding the period from commencement of winding-up proceedings to the winding-up order and one year thereafter, the application filed on 30-10-2000 was far beyond time. The alleged acknowledgment was also held insufficient to extend limitation because it was beyond the limitation period and was not proved in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The application was barred by time.

---