https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98980 Section 559 of the Companies Act, 1956 was construed as imposing a strict two-year limit on the court's power to declare a company's dissolution void, not merely a deadline for filing the application. The wording was contrasted with section 560(6), which expressly speaks to the making of an application, showing that Parliament used different language for different legal effects. On the facts, the request was made after expiry of the two-year period, and the dissolution had followed an amalgamation under which assets and liabilities had already been transferred, leaving no undistributed assets to recover. The court therefore lacked jurisdiction to grant the declaration, and the petition was dismissed as time-barred and of no practical utility. en-us Mon, 10 Jul 1972 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Jan 2012 17:29:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98980 Section 559 of the Companies Act, 1956 was construed as imposing a strict two-year limit on the court's power to declare a company's dissolution void, not merely a deadline for filing the application. The wording was contrasted with section 560(6), which expressly speaks to the making of an application, showing that Parliament used different language for different legal effects. On the facts, the request was made after expiry of the two-year period, and the dissolution had followed an amalgamation under which assets and liabilities had already been transferred, leaving no undistributed assets to recover. The court therefore lacked jurisdiction to grant the declaration, and the petition was dismissed as time-barred and of no practical utility. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 10 Jul 1972 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98980