Limitation under Company Law Board appeals bars extension beyond the statutory extra 60 days; condonation was refused.

Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 provides a 60-day period to appeal against a Company Law Board order and allows extension only up to a further 60 days on sufficient cause. Treating that provision as a special limitation scheme, the Madras High Court applied express exclusion under section 29(2) of the Limitation Act and the statutory bar created by the words limiting extension. It held that section 5 of the Limitation Act cannot be used to extend time beyond the additional 60 days. As the delay exceeded that ceiling, condonation was refused.

---

---

Issues: Whether delay of 64 days in filing the appeal against the Company Law Board order could be condoned under section 5 of the Limitation Act despite the proviso to section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956.

Analysis: Section 10F prescribes a limitation period of 60 days for an appeal against a Company Law Board order and permits a further period of not exceeding 60 days only on showing sufficient cause. The provision was treated as a special law prescribing a complete scheme for limitation and extension of time. Applying the principle of express exclusion under section 29(2) of the Limitation Act, and following the interpretation that the words limiting extension and using the expression 'not exceeding' bar further enlargement, the court held that section 5 of the Limitation Act cannot be invoked beyond the additional 60 days. The delay in the present case exceeded that ceiling.

Conclusion: The delay could not be condoned and the petition for condonation failed.

---