2021 (7) TMI 1040 - HC - Indian Laws

Court awards plaintiff in recovery suit, rejects time-barred defense, upholds acknowledgment of debt through post-dated cheques.

S. Jahaber Kassim Versus Sukhversha

The court decreed in favor of the plaintiff in a recovery of money suit against the defendant, awarding Rs. 5,00,000 with 9% interest. The defendant's ... Dishonor of Cheque - suit barred by limitation or not - denial of execution of pronote - suit is filed only after 8 years from the date of execution of the pronote - time limitation in case post dated cheque issued - HELD THAT:- The cheques dated 28.04.2008 and 28.04.2009 were not presented for collection and both cheques had lost their validity. Insofar as the cheque dated 28.04.2011 is concerned, the complaint was lodged and referred before Lok Adalat. The last payment made by the defendant on 21.09.2012 and it was duly recorded and the complaint was closed by an order dated 21.09.2012 which was marked as Ex. A8 - Insofar as the receipt of ₹ 10,00,000/-, the execution of pronote and the issuance of cheques are concerned, the defendant, during his cross examination, categorically admitted that the plaintiff entrusted a sum of ₹ 10,00,000/- for investment and towards the repayment of the said amount, the defendant issued four post dated cheques to the plaintiff, in which, three cheques were marked as Ex. A2, Ex. A3 and Ex. A4. He also categorically admitted the signature found in the pronote, which was marked as Ex. A1. Therefore, after entrustment of ₹ 10,00,000/-, on demand, the defendant executed the pronote on 28.03.2007 and on the same day, he also issued four cheques towards the repayment of ₹ 10,00,000/-. According to Section 19 of the Indian Limitation Act, when the defendant made payment on account of the cheque before the expiration of prescribed period, a fresh period of limitation shall be computed from the time when the payment was made. Therefore, it is clear that when the defendant issued four post dated cheques and thereby acknowledged the amount due to the plaintiff. The Limitation starts from the date of instrument irrespective of the fact that the defendant issued four post dated cheques. The last payment was made by the defendant on 21.09.2012 and the suit was filed on 03.09.2015 - Therefore, it is well within the time and the Court below rightly decreed the suit. The Trial Court directed to defendant to pay a sum of ₹ 5,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of pronote till the date of realization - this Court finds no merits in this Appeal Suit - Appeal suit is dismissed. Issues:1. Recovery of money suit filed by plaintiff against defendant for breach of trust and non-repayment.2. Defendant's denial of execution of promissory note and claim of suit being time-barred.3. Examination of evidence and legal arguments regarding limitation period and acknowledgment of debt through post-dated cheques.Analysis:1. The plaintiff filed a suit against the defendant for recovery of money amounting to Rs. 10,00,000 entrusted for investment, with the defendant issuing a pronote and post-dated cheques. The defendant denied the execution of the pronote and claimed the suit was time-barred as it was filed after 8 years. The court framed issues on entitlement, limitation, and cause of action.2. Evidence presented included the plaintiff's testimony, documents, and the defendant's denial and arguments. The court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff for Rs. 5,00,000 with 9% interest, leading to the defendant's appeal.3. The defendant argued the suit was time-barred under the Limitation Act, citing the date of pronote execution and cheques issuance. However, the plaintiff contended that the acknowledgment of debt through the cheques extended the limitation period. The court found the suit timely filed based on the acknowledgment of debt through the cheques, rejecting the defendant's appeal and upholding the lower court's decision for payment of the principal amount with interest.