https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113935 An application for rectification of a company name was held barred where the earlier limitation period under section 22 of the Companies Act, 1956 had already expired before the application was filed. The later amendment, which expanded the class of applicants to registered trade mark proprietors and adjusted the timing framework, did not revive a remedy that had already become time-barred under the unamended provision. The rectification order was therefore unsustainable, and the direction to delete the disputed word from the company name was quashed. en-us Wed, 09 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Nov 2014 14:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113935 An application for rectification of a company name was held barred where the earlier limitation period under section 22 of the Companies Act, 1956 had already expired before the application was filed. The later amendment, which expanded the class of applicants to registered trade mark proprietors and adjusted the timing framework, did not revive a remedy that had already become time-barred under the unamended provision. The rectification order was therefore unsustainable, and the direction to delete the disputed word from the company name was quashed. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 09 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113935