TMI Blog1957 (9) TMI 95X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. The lower Court found that the suit was barred by limitation. The learned counsel for the appellants concedes that the conclusion is correct but for Ex. A-1, an endorsement on Ex. A made by the defendant and signed by him on 18-10-1121. The endorsement reads as follows: (Endorsement in Malayalam omitted.) 3. Section 19(1) of the Travancore Limitation Act (Act VI of 1100) provides: Where, before the expiration of the period prescribed for a suit or application in respect of any property or right, an acknowledgment of liability in respect of such property or right has been made in writing signed by the party against whom such property or right is claimed, or by some person through whom he derives title or liability, or by some ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Explanation. - The words agent duly authorised in this behalf shall include the Kar-navan of a Malabar Tarwad and the manager of an undivided Hindu family where the accounts stated relate to the Tarwad or family transactions. In Shamlal v. Gulabchand AIR 1935 Nag 221 (A), Subhedar, A. J. C., dealing with a similar contention said: The question for determination then is if Ex. P-1 could be regarded as an account settled. In my opinion the answer to this must be in the negative. Although the document recites that an account was made and ₹ 375 were found due on an old sarkat, Ex. P-1, cannot be regarded as 'accounts stated' within the meaning of Article 64 of the Limitation Schedule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... then agreeing that it has been discharged to such and such an extent, so that there will be complete satisfaction on payment of the agreed balance. Hence, there is mutual consideration to support the promises on either side and to constitute the new cause of action . and: The authorities referred to above show that where an account has been settled, it is immaterial that some of the items were statute-barred. It has not been decided whether the same principle would be applied if all the items were statute-barred, 7. The question as to what happens when all the items are barred by limitation (as in this case) arose for consideration in Ganesh Prasad v. Rambati Bai, AIR 1942 Nag 92 (C). Grille, J., said: If the whole account is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e an acknowledgment under the Limitation Act is required to be made before the expiration of the period of limitation, a promise under this section to pay a debt may be made after the limitation period. After the period of limitation expires, nothing short of an express promise will provide a fresh period of limitation; an implied promise is not sufficient. (The Indian Contract Act, Eighth Edition, p. 216) It is agreed that Ex. A-1 will not amount to an express promise and that the suit cannot be saved under Section 26(3) of the Travancore Contract Act. 9. As pointed out by Wanchoo, C. J., in Ran Bahadur Singh v. Hanuwant Singh, AIR 1957 Raj 29 (E): An account stated is no more than an agreement. and when the entire claim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
