https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196537 The Supreme Court held that Exhibits B-4 and A-8 did not constitute valid acknowledgments of liability by the Appellant, thus not extending the limitation period under Article 47 of the Limitation Act, 1963. As a result, the suit filed by the Respondent for recovery of the bid amount was deemed barred by limitation. The appeal was allowed, and the judgments of the trial court and the High Court were set aside, leading to the dismissal of the Respondent's suit without any costs awarded. en-us Wed, 19 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Dec 2017 17:42:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196537 The Supreme Court held that Exhibits B-4 and A-8 did not constitute valid acknowledgments of liability by the Appellant, thus not extending the limitation period under Article 47 of the Limitation Act, 1963. As a result, the suit filed by the Respondent for recovery of the bid amount was deemed barred by limitation. The appeal was allowed, and the judgments of the trial court and the High Court were set aside, leading to the dismissal of the Respondent's suit without any costs awarded. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 19 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196537