Supreme Court: Time spent in winding up cannot exclude recovery suit filing

Trade Centre, specifically addressing whether the suit was barred by limitation and if the plaintiff's status as a registered partnership firm was validly proved.

Who it concerns: Appellant: Mageba Bridge Products Private Limited; Respondent: M/s. Trade Centre; Judge: Justice K. Vinod Chandran.

What the court decided

• The Court held that the registration of the respondent-firm was sufficiently proved by Exhibit-8 and a certified copy of Form-VIII.
• The Court held that the time spent in winding up proceedings cannot be excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act for filing a separate recovery suit.
• The Court found that the suit for recovery was barred by limitation.
• The Court reversed the order of the High Court to the extent of granting relief for recovery.
• The suit was dismissed on the ground of limitation.
• The appeal was allowed.

Also in the document

• The Court noted that the Company Court had directed the respondent to secure Rs.12,38,000/- for two specific bills before the Civil Court within 3 weeks, keeping the company proceeding in abeyance.
• The Court observed that the Company Court was not competent to extend the limitation period for the civil suit.
• The Court clarified that the payment made by the appellant was for specific admitted invoices and did not constitute an acknowledgment of the entire debt claimed in the suit.