JUDGMENT - I.G. SHAH, J.:---The plaintiffs have filed this suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 3,06,669.50 p. being the amount due to them from the defendants Company in respect of the goods sold to them under four invoices dated 24-2-1983, 3-3-1983, 6-3-1983 and 25-3-1983 as stated in para 2 of the plaint. The total amount due in respect of the said invoices is claimed to be Rs. 2,28,642.50 p. The plaintiffs claim further in the plaint that the amounts in respect of the said invoices were due on expiry of the period of one month and the defendants were liable to pay to the plaintiffs interest at the rate of 20% per annum on the amount as mutually agreed. The plaintiffs also claim that the defendants made party payments or of Rs. 50,000/- on 14-3-1983 and therefore, the balance due towards the said invoices was Rs. 1,78,642.50 p. The plaintiffs further in para 14 of the plaint state that their suit is within limitation as the defendants have condoned and waived the said plea of limitation by admitting an acknowledgement of liability to pay the amount due to the plaintiffs and by entering into consent terms and submitting to a consent order in Appeal No. 837 of 1986 which was carried against the conditional order passed by Parekh, J. in Petition No. 683 of 1985 filed by the plaintiffs seeking an order of winding up of the defendants' Company on the ground that the defendants' company was unable to pay its debts by non compliance of the notice under section 434 of the Companies Act within the period prescribed. The plaintiffs also claim that in the Appeal which was carried by the defendants against the order passed by Parekh, J., the consent terms submitted and on the basis of the said consent terms, consent order came to be passed on 30-7-1986 whereby the order passed by the original Court was confirmed and the period to deposit the amount by the defendants and for filing of the suit by the plaintiffs was extended by 2 and 10 weeks respectively from 10-10-1986. The plaintiffs further claim that all objections by the defendants to the claim of the plaintiffs on the ground of limitation have been given up or are deemed to have been given up by the defendants at the time when the said consent terms were filed in the said Appeal and the defendants submitted to the said consent order dated 10-10-1986 in the said Appeal No. 837 of 1986 and that the said consent order dated 10-10-1986 has been further acted upon by the defendants by depositing the sum of Rs. 60,000/- in the Court on 25-11-1986 within the time extended by the order of the Appeal Court dated 10-10-1986. The plaintiffs also claim that they have filed the present suit pursuant to the said orders and within the time extended by the Appeal Court. They also contended that without prejudice to the aforesaid contentions of the plaintiffs, the said petition was ordered to be admitted by the said order 30-7-1986 upon the terms and conditions contained therein and the said order dated 30-7-1986 has been confirmed by the Appeal Court on 10-10-1986 by passing the said consent order and, therefore, on admission of the petition even if conditionally, said debt relates back to the date of filing of the petition, viz. 4-9-1985 when the said debt was within the period of limitation. The plaintiffs further claim that the present suit is filed by the plaintiffs in terms of the machinery provided by the said orders dated 30-7-1986 and 10-10-1986 and the filing of the suit does not alter the position of relating back of the claim of the plaintiffs to the date of the filing of the petition as a result of conditional admission of the said petition and that the entire claim of the plaintiffs was brought within the period of limitation by filing the petition and also the order dated 30-7-1986 and the said order being also confirmed in Appeal on 10-10-1986.

2. The defendants did not file their written statement, but raised the question of limitation and contended that on the basis of the facts st

Click Here to Read the rest of this document