Special limitation under Companies Act appeal excludes further condonation beyond the statutory outer limit.

Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 allows an appeal on a question of law within 60 days of communication of the order, with a further period not exceeding 60 days on sufficient cause being shown. The Bombay High Court held that this special limitation scheme, read with section 29(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963, expressly excludes any additional enlargement under section 5. The phrase "not exceeding 60 days" was treated as a mandatory outer limit, consistent with the Act's scheme of speedy disposal by a specialised tribunal and restricted appellate review. Accordingly, delay beyond that extended period cannot be condoned.

---

---

Issues: Whether the proviso to section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 excludes the applicability of section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 so as to bar condonation of delay beyond the prescribed extended period in an appeal against an order of the Company Law Board.

Analysis: Section 10F confers a right of appeal on a question of law within sixty days of communication of the order, and the proviso permits filing within a further period not exceeding sixty days on sufficient cause being shown. Applying section 29(2) of the Limitation Act, the Court held that where a special law prescribes a different period of limitation, sections 4 to 24 of the Limitation Act apply only to the extent they are not expressly excluded. The words 'not exceeding 60 days' were held to be equivalent to 'not beyond' and to manifest an express exclusion of any further extension under section 5. The Court also relied on the scheme and object of the Companies Act in creating a specialised tribunal for speedy disposal and limiting appeals to questions of law, which supported the conclusion that the statutory limit was mandatory and unextendable.

Conclusion: Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not apply to appeals under section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 beyond the further period of sixty days, and the delay in the present case could not be condoned.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a special statute prescribes a total outer limit for filing an appeal and uses language indicating that no further extension is permissible, section 5 of the Limitation Act is excluded by necessary implication under section 29(2).

---