- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
Visvanatha Santhasingaro v. Ramachandra Mardraja Deo
1. The plaintiff sues to recover the balance of principal and interest due on a registered lease for Fasli 1311. The four instalments were due on 15th days of November and December 1901 and January and February 1902. The suit was instituted on 20th April, 1910. To save limitation the plaintiff relies on Exhibit A, dated the 15th February, 1905, as an acknowledgment under Section 19 of the Limitation Act, and also on a payment of Rs. 20 sent with Exhibit A, which was alleged to be a part payment within the meaning of S. 20.
2. The District Judge has upheld both pleas.
3. Exhibit A, which is signed by the defendant, runs as follows: “In respect of the mustagiri lease of Kodali Village in Khalodamuta in Otagada taluk, Viswahath Santo sent Rs. 20 through the barber of Sanaloks Village. The same should be credited to the chitta (or account) and receipt granted.”
4. The District Judge says the payment is expressly made towards the rent due for Kodali village for Fasli 1311. In bar opinion it contains a clear statement that the Rs. 20 was paid on account of the rent, and was to be credited in the rental account. This appears to contain a clear admission that the rent was then due, from which an implied promise to pay whatever was actually due may be inferred, and is sufficient to save the bar of limitation, Maniram Seth v. Seth Bupchand(1). The District Judge has also held that the Rs. 20 Sent with Exhibit A was a part payment of the principal of a debt, within the meaning of S. 20, and that in Exhibit A the fact of the payment appeared in the handwriting of the person writing the same, within the meaning of S. 20, although Exhibit A was written and signed before the actual payment. A ruling of Sale, J., in In the matter of Ambrose Summers, an Insolvent(2), to the same effect has been cited before us, but it is unnecessary to express any final opinion on the point, as the appeal fails on the other ground and must be dismissed with costs.
S.N/R.K
5. Appeal dismissed.
Alert