https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198094 Refund of earnest money was held to fall under the residuary limitation article because the payment was security for performance, not part payment of price or money paid on a consideration that failed; the claim was therefore within time. A further sum paid as advance towards the purchase price was treated as money paid on an existing consideration that later failed, so the specific limitation article applied and the claim was time-barred. Section 36(a) of the Displaced Persons (Debts Adjustment) Act, 1951, did not save the barred claim because the contractual performance had already become unlawful on the facts established. Relief was limited to the earnest money, and the additional advance was rejected. en-us Tue, 13 Dec 1966 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Jan 2018 18:26:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198094 Refund of earnest money was held to fall under the residuary limitation article because the payment was security for performance, not part payment of price or money paid on a consideration that failed; the claim was therefore within time. A further sum paid as advance towards the purchase price was treated as money paid on an existing consideration that later failed, so the specific limitation article applied and the claim was time-barred. Section 36(a) of the Displaced Persons (Debts Adjustment) Act, 1951, did not save the barred claim because the contractual performance had already become unlawful on the facts established. Relief was limited to the earnest money, and the additional advance was rejected. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 13 Dec 1966 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198094