In Holden v. California Emp. etc. Com. (1950) 101 Cal. App. 2d 427, the court found that a dismissal for lack of prosecution or undue delay did not meet the requirements of former sections 581a and 583. It then said: "While the statutory provisions are not exclusive, and the courts have recognized that it is an inherent power of the court to grant motions to dismiss for reasons not set forth in the statute , it has several times been held that former section 583 fixes a minimum period of two years during which a court is prohibited from dismissing for mere delay. As held in these cases, if this were not so, the minimum period of two years and the maximum period of five years set forth in former section 583 would be meaningless. Even if the court possesses inherent power in its discretion to dismiss for failure to prosecute for less than two years, a dismissal in the present case, ten months after the petition was filed, on the showing made, would constitute an abuse of discretion." (Holden, at pp. 437-438.)