Judgment

S.H. Kapadia, J. —

Leave granted.

2.A short question which arises for determination in this civil appeal is : whether misfeasance proceedings filed by the Official Liquidator on 1.12.89 under Section 543(1) of the Companies Act stood barred by limitation provided for in Section 543(2) of the said Act.

3.The facts of this case lie in a very narrow compass.

4.On 2.12.83 Order of winding up was passed by the High Court. Official Liquidator (“O.L.”, for short) was appointed on that day. The period of five years referred to in Section 543(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 (“companies Act”, for short) expired on 1.12.1988. As stated above, misfeasance proceedings were filed by the O.L. on 1.12.89. Therefore, contention has been raised by the appellant that the said proceedings filed on 1.12.89 stood filed beyond limitation as prescribed under Section 543(2) of the said Act. Under the said section the period is five years from the date of the Order for winding up or of the first appointment of the liquidator in the winding up.

5.Mr. Shyam Divan, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, submitted at the outset that since limitation is specifically provided for of five ye