https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776626 The NCLAT held that the limitation period for a member to file an application for restoration of a company's name under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 is twenty years, not three years. The Tribunal's earlier view limiting the period to three years was set aside. Given the company owned substantial property valued at Rs. 6 crores, failure to restore its name would cause irreparable loss and contradict public policy. The NCLAT directed the ROC to restore the company's name to the Register of Companies, subject to compliance with conditions, allowing the appeal and overturning the NCLT order dated 15.10.2024. en-us Mon, 11 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Aug 2025 13:04:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776626 The NCLAT held that the limitation period for a member to file an application for restoration of a company's name under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 is twenty years, not three years. The Tribunal's earlier view limiting the period to three years was set aside. Given the company owned substantial property valued at Rs. 6 crores, failure to restore its name would cause irreparable loss and contradict public policy. The NCLAT directed the ROC to restore the company's name to the Register of Companies, subject to compliance with conditions, allowing the appeal and overturning the NCLT order dated 15.10.2024. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 11 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776626