R.S. Narula, J.
1. In this claim petition by Hind Chit Fund (Private) Ltd. (in liquidation), for the recovery of Rs. 802 as the balance due on the promissory note, exhibit P-6, the only defence, pressed by Mr. Harbans Lal, learned counsel for the respondents, is of limitation. Though in paragraph 6 of the petition it has been stated that the cause of action arose in favour of the petitioner against the respondents on January 29, 1968, the date on which the last payment was made by respondent No. 1, it is not in dispute between the parties at the stage of arguments that the cause of action for filing this claim petition arose for the last time on January 31, 1968, the date of execution of the promissory note. No claim has been made by the petitioner under Section 19 or Section 20 of the Limitation Act for extending the period of limitation on account of any part payment or any acknowledgment after the date of execution of the pro note. The last date on which the suit for the recovery of the amount due on the pro note or the balance thereof could, therefore, be filed would have been January 31, 1971, that is three years after the date of execution of the pro note. To the said period of three years the petitioner is entitled to add 300 days spent in the process of winding up from January 8, 1971 (the date of presentation of the petition for winding up), to November 5 1971 (the date on which the winding up order was passed), and another one year under Section 458A of the Companies Act, 1956. This entitles the petitioner to exclude from the normal period of limitation the above-said period of 665 days. The actual time taken by the petitioner in filing this claim petition on February 14, 1973, is 743 days after January 31, 1971, The petitioner was at best entitled to add 665 days. The claim petition is, therefore, obviously barred by time, and is accordingly dismissed with costs. Counsel's fee Rs. 100.