https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467847 A member seeking restoration of a struck-off company's name is covered by Section 252(1) of the Companies Act, 2013, not Section 252(3), because the statutory scheme does not create separate appeal regimes based on whether striking off was involuntary or voluntary. The Tribunal held that a member falls within the class of persons entitled to seek restoration as an aggrieved person against dissolution under Section 248, and the applicable limitation period is three years under Section 252(1). The earlier view treating the matter under Section 252(3) was incorrect, so the dismissal on maintainability and limitation was unsustainable and the matter was remitted for decision on merits. en-us Thu, 10 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Apr 2026 19:07:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467847 A member seeking restoration of a struck-off company's name is covered by Section 252(1) of the Companies Act, 2013, not Section 252(3), because the statutory scheme does not create separate appeal regimes based on whether striking off was involuntary or voluntary. The Tribunal held that a member falls within the class of persons entitled to seek restoration as an aggrieved person against dissolution under Section 248, and the applicable limitation period is three years under Section 252(1). The earlier view treating the matter under Section 252(3) was incorrect, so the dismissal on maintainability and limitation was unsustainable and the matter was remitted for decision on merits. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 10 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467847