https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196324 Letters from the defendant's records were held proved and admissible because they formed part of a continuous correspondence, came from proper custody, were tendered without objection, and were supported by oral evidence of receipt. The Court further held that an acknowledgement under Section 18 of the Limitation Act does not require an express promise to pay; it is enough that the writing shows a present subsisting liability and a jural relationship. The letters admitted receipt of money and described it as an advance or deposit, which amounted in law to an acknowledgement of liability and extended limitation. The suit was therefore within time and maintainable. en-us Tue, 26 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 May 2024 10:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196324 Letters from the defendant's records were held proved and admissible because they formed part of a continuous correspondence, came from proper custody, were tendered without objection, and were supported by oral evidence of receipt. The Court further held that an acknowledgement under Section 18 of the Limitation Act does not require an express promise to pay; it is enough that the writing shows a present subsisting liability and a jural relationship. The letters admitted receipt of money and described it as an advance or deposit, which amounted in law to an acknowledgement of liability and extended limitation. The suit was therefore within time and maintainable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 26 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196324