TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Suit dismissed due to time limit expiry & insufficient acknowledgments of liability</h1> <h3>Alliance Paints and Varnish Works Pvt. Ltd. Versus Hari Kishan Gupta (Deceased) through LRs.</h3> The court held that the suit was barred by limitation under section 3 of the Limitation Act, 1963. It found that the respondent's claim, based on an ... - Issues Involved:1. Bar of Limitation2. Mutual, Open, and Current Account3. Acknowledgment of LiabilitySummary:1. Bar of Limitation:The appellant contended that the suit was barred by limitation u/s 3 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The respondent's claim was based on an amount due as of 28.05.1988, and the suit was filed on 27.05.1991. The court emphasized that if a suit is time-barred, it must be dismissed regardless of whether the limitation defense is raised.2. Mutual, Open, and Current Account:The appellant argued that Article 1 of the Limitation Act, which pertains to mutual, open, and current accounts, was inapplicable. The court agreed, stating that the respondent failed to prove the existence of a mutual account. Citing precedents, the court clarified that mutual accounts require reciprocal demands creating independent obligations on both sides, which was not the case here.3. Acknowledgment of Liability:The appellant challenged the trial court's reliance on 'C' Forms as acknowledgments of liability u/s 19 of the Limitation Act. The court held that 'C' Forms, which acknowledged the receipt of goods, did not constitute an acknowledgment of debt. The court emphasized that for a document to extend the limitation period, it must explicitly acknowledge a subsisting liability, which the 'C' Forms did not. The court cited several precedents to support this interpretation and concluded that the 'C' Forms could not be construed as acknowledgments of liability.Conclusion:The court found that the suit was barred by limitation and that the 'C' Forms did not extend the limitation period. Consequently, the impugned judgment and decree dated 6th December 1996 were set aside, and the appeal was disposed of accordingly.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
