9911796707
TMI Blog1963 (12) TMI 15X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 63, and it was drawn up on April 3, 1963. On January 15, the petitioner applied for a copy of the order ; but for want of steps it was struck off on April 17, 1963. The petitioner again applied for a copy on June 24, 1963. The question is whether the copy application is in time. To decide this matter, it is necessary to refer to three sections of the Companies Act, 1956. Sub-section (1) of sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the time factor is concerned, have to be read and understood in the light of section 640A, which provides for exclusion of time required in obtaining copies of orders of court. This section says that, whenever a court's order is required to be filed with the Registrar within a specified period, in computing that period, the time taken in drawing up the order and in obtaining a copy thereof, shall ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny application filed beyond three months of the date of the order, in any case within a further period of one month, in view of the proviso to sub-section (2) of section 19, would be out of time. Reliance for this construction is placed on a decision of mine in Janardhana Mills Ltd. v. Registrar of Companies [1964] 34 Comp. Cas. 333 . I do not think that either the construction contended for by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of three months from the date of the order would be counted excluding the time taken for drawing up the order. The period should also be counted further excluding the time taken in obtaining a copy of the order. A second copy application in this case is within a period of three months of the drawing up of the order and that brings it within the time. I hold, therefore, that the copy application ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
