Procedural amendment to misfeasance limitation allowed later winding-up claims despite earlier time-bar under prior law.

Amendment of Section 235(1) of the Companies Act, 1913 replaced the earlier limitation regime for misfeasance applications in winding up with a procedural framework that applied to later proceedings. The Court treated the provision as procedural, so no vested substantive right survived to rely on the former limitation defence merely because the alleged misfeasance occurred earlier. The amended section therefore permitted Official Liquidators to pursue compensation claims notwithstanding that a suit on the same acts would have been time-barred under the prior law, subject to compliance with the express limitation in the amended provision and the Court's discretion to consider delay where appropriate.

---

---

Issues: Whether the amended Section 235(1) of the Companies Act, 1913 applied to misfeasance claims brought after the 1936 amendment even though the underlying acts may have been time-barred under the earlier law.

Analysis: The amended provision introduced a new procedural regime for misfeasance applications in winding up and expressly removed the former sub-section that had applied the Limitation Act as if the application were a suit. The amendment was held to govern liquidations and applications arising after it came into force. The Court treated the section as procedural in nature, and therefore concluded that no vested substantive right to rely on the earlier limitation defence survived merely because the alleged misfeasance pre-dated the amendment. At the same time, the Court noted that the section remained discretionary, so lapse of time could still be considered in the exercise of judicial discretion in a proper case.

Conclusion: The amended Section 235(1) permitted the Official Liquidators to pursue misfeasance proceedings and seek compensation notwithstanding that a suit on the same acts would have been barred under the former limitation law, provided the express limitation in the amended section itself was satisfied.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a winding-up misfeasance provision is amended by removing the old statutory limitation regime and substituting a new procedural framework, the amended procedure applies to later applications and may revive scrutiny of earlier acts, because no vested right exists in a procedural limitation defence unless the legislature clearly preserves it.

---