Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. National Minorities Development And Finance Coproration Versus Andhra Pradesh Mahila Welfare Society Thr Its President & Ors

2016 (8) TMI 1097 - DELHI HIGH COURT

Guarantee executed by the defendant - period of limitation extended on account of the acknowledgement of debt, in terms of Section 19 of the Limitation Act, 1963 - Held that:- Where a payment is made on account of a debt, before the prescribed period of limitation under the said Act expires, by the debtor, a fresh period of limitation is set into motion from the time such payment is made. - In the present appeal, it is observed that subsequent upon the disbursement of the loan on 23.12.2000, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ent of debt in writing by the defendants apart from this unsupported argument of “continuous guarantee” set up by the appellant. Thus, the provision of Section 19 of the said Act, are not attracted to the facts of the present case. - RFA 589/2016 - Dated:- 16-8-2016 - MR SIDDHARTH MRIDUL J. Appellant Through: Mr. Danish Zubair Khan, Advocate Respondents Through: None SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL) CM APPL.29547/2016 (Condonation of Delay in Refiling) For the reasons stated in the application, which .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nt and Finance Corporation vs. Andhra Pradesh Mahila Welfare Society & Ors. whereby the said suit for recovery of money, instituted on behalf of the appellant herein came to be dismissed, as being barred by limitation. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant canvasses a solitary ground before this Court in the present appeal. It is urged on behalf of the appellant that the guarantee executed by the defendant was in the nature of a continuing guarantee and that consequently, s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ore the expiration of the prescribed period by the person liable to pay the debt or legacy or by his agent duly authorised in this behalf, a fresh period of limitation shall be computed from the time when the payment was made: Provided that, save in the case of payment of interest made before the 1st day of January, 1928, an acknowledgement of the payment appears in the handwriting of, or in a writing signed by, the person making the payment. Explanation. - For the purpose of this section, - (a) .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

5. In the present appeal, it is observed that subsequent upon the disbursement of the loan on 23.12.2000, the appellant has not averred that any payment has been received from the defendants. 6. In this backdrop, the learned trial court dismissed the suit with the following order:- Vide this order, I shall dispose arguments on the point of limitation. Present suit has been filed by the plaintiff against defendants for recovery of ₹ 3,80,366/- (Rupees Three Lacs Eighty Thousand Three Hundre .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

defendants avoided to pay back the same on one pretext or the other. As per statement of account, a sum of ₹ 3,80,366 /-(Rupees Three Lacs Eighty Thousand Three Hundred Sixty Six) was due as on 16.06.2014. Demand notice dated 24.06.2014 was sent to the defendants calling upon them to repay the amount due, but of no avail. 2. Perusal of averments of the plaint shows that the plaintiff has sought to recover the loan amount advanced in the year 2000 in two installments and last installment w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t extend the period of limitation. The limitation can be extended only either by way of acknowledgement of debt in writing or part payment of debt as provided under Sections 18 & 19 of the Limitation Act, 1963. In the absence of any document i.e. acknowledgement of debt in writing or part payment of debt allegedly made by the defendants, I hold that there is inordinate delay in filing of the present suit. So, the present suit, being barred by limitation, is liable to be dismissed. Accordingl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version