Inordinate delay and laches can bar company relief even when applicability of later limitation provisions is disputed.

An unexplained delay of more than five years barred the company petition on laches. Although applicability of Section 433 of the Companies Act, 2013 to older matters was disputed, the tribunal held that the appellant could not escape the consequence of inordinate delay where the cause of action had ended long earlier and no fresh cause was shown. The plea of non-receipt of dividends was rejected on the facts, including the appellant's own use of the relevant address. The appeal was therefore dismissed as not entertainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the company petition deserved to be entertained in view of the delay of more than five years and the plea of limitation and laches.

Analysis: The cause of action had ended by 31 December 2010, while the company petition was filed only in September 2015 and refiled in January 2016. Even assuming that Section 433 of the Companies Act, 2013 would not apply to old cases, the appellant could not avoid the consequence of unexplained delay and laches. The removal from directorship had occurred long earlier and no subsequent cause of action was shown. The explanation regarding non-receipt of dividends was rejected on the facts, including the appellant's own use of the relevant address.

Conclusion: The appeal was not entertainable and was dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: An unexplained and inordinate delay in invoking company jurisdiction can bar relief on the ground of laches even where the applicability of a later statutory limitation provision is disputed.

---