TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether an application by the official liquidator under section 446(2)(b) of the Companies Act, 1956 for recovery of a debt was barred by limitation, and whether article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 read with section 458A of the Companies Act, 1956 made it within time.
Analysis: The claim under section 446(2)(b) was treated as an enforceable claim governed by the residuary article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The right to apply accrued on the date of the winding-up order, and the benefit of section 458A required exclusion of the period between presentation of the winding-up petition and the winding-up order, together with the additional statutory period of one year. On that computation, the application filed on 22 August 1980 fell within the permissible period.
Conclusion: The application was not barred by limitation and was maintainable.
Final Conclusion: The official liquidator's recovery application succeeded, and the debt was ordered to be paid with costs and interest.
Ratio Decidendi: For a claim by an official liquidator under section 446(2)(b) of the Companies Act, 1956, limitation under article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 begins when the right to apply accrues on the winding-up order, subject to the statutory exclusion of time under section 458A of the Companies Act, 1956.
TaxTMI 
