The main legal point established in the judgment is that the operation of the Limitation Act remained suspended and inapplicable during the winding up proceedings, and the company was entitled to invoke the aid of Section 458-A of the Companies Act.

( 1 ) THESE three revisions arise from the orders of the Court below dated 8-12-1992 in Miscellaneous Case Nos. 435 and 433 of 1988, and order dated 2-2-1993 in Execution Case No. 51 of 1991, respectively, passed dismissing the common petitioner's applications filed under Order 9, Rules 3 and 4 of Civil Procedure Code in said Miscellaneous Case Nos. 435 and 433 of 1988, and application under Order 21, Rule 10, Civil Procedure Code in Execution Case No. 51 of 1991, as time barred.

( 2 ) CERTAIN undisputed facts are that petitioner (hereinafter called the 'company') had filed the suit in S. C. No. 3342 of 1981 against respondents in Civil Revision Petition No. 817 of 1993 and S. C. 3341 of 1981 against respondents in Civil Revision Petition No. 1074 of 1993 for recovery of certain debts due to the company from them. On 9-12-1992 both the said suits were dismissed for default by the Trial Court.

( 3 ) THEREAFTER, the respective applications under Order 9, Rules 4 and 5 read with Section 151, Civil Procedure Code were made by the company before the Court below in Miscellaneous Case Nos. 433 and 435 of 1988 along with LA. No. 1 under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, praying to restore the said suits in S. C. Nos. 3341 and 3342 of 1981 to its file by condoning the delay caused in making of the said applications and permit the company to prosecute further proceedings in the suits. 3 (a ). In Execution Case No. 51 of 1991, the company had filed the execution petition on 26-6-1991 in the Court below seeking execution of money decree dated 21-8-1972 against the judgement-debtor passed in S. C. No. 74 of 1972 for recovery of a sum of Rs. 745. 70 claiming benefit of Section 458-A of the Companies Act saving the period of limitation.

( 4 ) IN both the aforementioned cases in Miscellaneous Case Nos. 435 and 433 of 1988, the reason for the delay in making the said applications is sworn to in the affidavit of the company's official filed in support of respective LA. No. 1. The cause for the delay averred therein that on the winding up petitions of its creditors made before the High Court of Kerala in Civil Petition Nos. 8, 9 and 49 of 1991 on its original jurisdiction side against the company, the winding up order dated 13-10-1981 was passed by that company Court appointing a Provisional Liquidator and on appeal therefrom filed by the company in Miscellaneous First Appeal Nos. 518, 519 and 520 of 1981, the High Court of Kerala passed its order dated 8-10-1982 therein keeping the said winding up order in abeyance subject to condition relating to deposit of certain amount by the company. That condition is said to have been complied by it. Admittedly, the said order dated 8-10-1982 passed in the said appeals is still said to be in force. Thereafter, in 1985 the company moved an application before the High Court of Kerala in the said appeals seeking permission to take necessary legal action to recover the amounts due from its debtors. Then an order dated 31-7-1985 was passed by the High Court authorising the officers of the company to represent it in suits or other legal proceedings filed by or against the company in various subordinate Courts. On appointment of provisional Liquidator by the High Court by its order dated 13-10-1981, the said Liquidator had taken complete charge of the affairs of the company together with all books, accounts etc. After the said permission was granted to the company by the High Court under its order dated 31-7-1985, the company's concerned officials had to collect back the relevant company's records, documents etc. , from the said Provisional Liquidator, which took considerable time. Hence the said delay in making of said applications in the said Miscellaneous Case Nos. 433 and 435 of 1988.

( 5 ) ALTERNATIVELY, the aid of Section 458-A of the Companies Act, 1956 ('the Act' for short) was invoked by the Company claiming exemption from operation against and applicability of the Limitation Act, 1963,