https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96602 Section 186 of the Indian Companies Act was treated as a summary remedy only, available where the underlying money claim remained recoverable in an ordinary suit. The Privy Council held that the provision did not create a new liability or override limitation, so claims already time-barred when the liquidators applied could not be enforced. It also rejected reliance on section 65 of the Indian Contract Act for the Rs. 35,000 claim, holding that, absent special circumstances, discovery of voidness is referred to the date of the agreement, leaving the claim time-barred. en-us Fri, 16 Dec 1932 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Jan 2012 16:44:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96602 Section 186 of the Indian Companies Act was treated as a summary remedy only, available where the underlying money claim remained recoverable in an ordinary suit. The Privy Council held that the provision did not create a new liability or override limitation, so claims already time-barred when the liquidators applied could not be enforced. It also rejected reliance on section 65 of the Indian Contract Act for the Rs. 35,000 claim, holding that, absent special circumstances, discovery of voidness is referred to the date of the agreement, leaving the claim time-barred. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 16 Dec 1932 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96602