Limitation for recovery suits: absence of a timely written acknowledgment defeated the claim under section 18.

A recovery suit based on 17 bills was held barred by limitation because it was filed well beyond the three-year period applicable to a money recovery action. The court found that extension under section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963 required a written acknowledgment signed by the defendant within three years from when the amounts became due, and no such acknowledgment appeared on record. An alleged reference in execution proceedings could not revive limitation because it was outside the relevant three-year period. The plea of acknowledgment therefore failed, and the suit was treated as time-barred.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the suit for recovery of the amounts due under the 17 bills was barred by limitation and whether any acknowledgment extended time under section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Analysis: The bills were of 1978-79, and the suit was filed in December 1990, well beyond the ordinary three-year period for a recovery action. Extension of limitation required an acknowledgment in writing signed by the defendant within three years of the date when the amounts became due. No such acknowledgment was shown on record. The alleged reference to statements in execution proceedings in 1985 could not satisfy section 18 because it was not within three years of the bills becoming payable.

Conclusion: The suit was barred by limitation and the plea of acknowledgment failed. The decision was against the appellant.

---