<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1933 (3) TMI 21 - RANGOON HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199282</link>
    <description>An acknowledgment of liability can save limitation under Section 19 of the Limitation Act even where no exact sum is admitted, if the writing clearly accepts that money is due and expresses an intention to pay the balance after accounts are verified. A letter stating that goods were purchased and not fully paid for was treated as sufficient acknowledgment and promise to pay. The document also explains that a letter said to have been written by a pleader on a client&#039;s instructions may be attributed to the client where surrounding evidence supports that inference and no contrary proof is produced. Such a letter is admissible against the client.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Mar 1933 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Feb 2018 14:41:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=510375" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1933 (3) TMI 21 - RANGOON HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199282</link>
      <description>An acknowledgment of liability can save limitation under Section 19 of the Limitation Act even where no exact sum is admitted, if the writing clearly accepts that money is due and expresses an intention to pay the balance after accounts are verified. A letter stating that goods were purchased and not fully paid for was treated as sufficient acknowledgment and promise to pay. The document also explains that a letter said to have been written by a pleader on a client&#039;s instructions may be attributed to the client where surrounding evidence supports that inference and no contrary proof is produced. Such a letter is admissible against the client.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Mar 1933 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199282</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>