Post-expiry extension of dissolution period remains maintainable where the court retains power to defer dissolution under the proviso to Section 497(5).

An application to defer dissolution remained maintainable even when filed after the three-month period from registration of the liquidator's accounts and returns, because the proviso to Section 497(5) preserved the court's power to extend the dissolution period. The court also treated earlier orders overruling the Registrar's objection as governing the matter, and noted that Section 559 independently preserved power to declare a dissolution void. The jurisdictional objection was rejected and the dissolution period was extended for six months.

---

---

Issues: Whether the court had jurisdiction to entertain and allow an application to defer dissolution after the expiry of the three-month period from registration of the liquidator's accounts and returns, and whether the dissolution period could be extended.

Analysis: The proviso to Section 497(5) empowered the court to extend the period before dissolution operated. The application was made after the expiry of three months, but the court held that this did not oust jurisdiction. Prior orders overruling the Registrar's objection were treated as governing the matter, and Section 559 also preserved power to declare a dissolution void in any event.

Conclusion: The objection to jurisdiction was rejected and the petition was allowed. The time for dissolution was extended for six months from 8th February, 1957.

Final Conclusion: The application succeeded and the court affirmed its power to grant post-expiry extension of the dissolution period.

Ratio Decidendi: An application to extend the dissolution period is maintainable even if made after the prescribed three-month period, and the court retains jurisdiction to grant such relief.

---