Acknowledgment of liability can save limitation only to the admitted debt, not an enlarged claim.

A reply notice can amount to an acknowledgment of liability for limitation purposes where it admits a subsisting debt. Here, the defendants' notice stated that an amount was due and payable under the original promissory note, which was treated as an acknowledgment under Section 19 of the Limitation Act. The alleged fresh promissory note was found not to have been executed, so the original debt remained enforceable only to the extent admitted. The acknowledgment saved limitation only for the admitted sum, not for the larger suit claim, and the decree was modified accordingly.

---

---

Issues: Whether the statement in the defendants' reply notice amounted to an acknowledgment of liability sufficient to save limitation, and if so, whether the plaintiff could recover the entire suit claim or only the sum admitted in the notice.

Analysis: The reply notice stated that the amount due and payable on the original promissory note was Rs. 2,550. That statement was treated as an admission that, on the date of the notice, the defendants ed a subsisting liability in that amount. The alleged fresh promissory note was found not to have been executed, and therefore the original debt remained enforceable to the extent admitted. However, an acknowledgment can operate to save limitation only for the amount acknowledged, not for a larger claim.

Conclusion: The statement in the reply notice amounted to an acknowledgment under Section 19 of the Limitation Act, but it saved limitation only for Rs. 2,550 with interest. The decree was therefore modified to that extent in favour of the plaintiff.

---