1963 (2) TMI 21 - HC - Companies Law

Summary

Issues: Application for directing payment, Time limitation under Companies Act, Interpretation of "any money due," Application of Indian Limitation Act, Cause of action for recovery

1. Application for directing payment:
The judgment pertains to an application filed by the official liquidator seeking a direction for the respondent to pay a specified amount. The court found the respondent liable based on a previous order. However, the respondent resisted the application on the grounds of time limitation under the Companies Act.

2. Time limitation under Companies Act:
The respondent contended that the application was barred by time, citing different sections of the Companies Act, 1956. The court analyzed the applicability of Section 543(2) and Section 469(1) to the case. It was held that Section 543 did not apply, but Section 469 was relevant. The court referred to a previous decision to support the interpretation of Section 469.

3. Interpretation of "any money due":
The court discussed the phrase "any money due" as used in Section 469 of the Companies Act. It referred to a previous case to establish that the applicant must demonstrate that the amount claimed is indeed due. The court emphasized that if the claim would be time-barred under the Indian Limitation Act, the amount cannot be considered due under Section 469.

4. Application of Indian Limitation Act:
The judgment referred to the Indian Limitation Act, 1908, and previous legal interpretations to determine the time limitation for the application under Section 469. It highlighted the importance of assessing whether the claim would be barred by time if a suit were to be instituted by the company.

5. Cause of action for recovery:
The official liquidator argued that the cause of action to recover the amount only arose on the date of the court's order finding the respondent liable. However, the court disagreed, stating that the liability was incurred when the debits were made, which was beyond the permissible time limit. Consequently, the court dismissed the application as time-barred.

Overall, the judgment delves into the intricacies of time limitation under the Companies Act and the interpretation of legal provisions regarding the recovery of dues by the official liquidator. It emphasizes the importance of adherence to statutory limitations and legal principles in such matters.