<?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>2011 (12) TMI 716 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278016</link>
    <description>A seller-buyer account is not a mutual, open and current account unless the dealings create reciprocal, independent obligations on both sides; mere supplies by one side and payments by the other do not satisfy Article 1 of the Limitation Act, 1963. For a claim to the balance due on a running, non-mutual account, Article 14 does not apply because it is confined to suits for the price of goods sold and delivered where no fixed credit period is agreed. In the absence of a specific article, the residuary Article 113 governs, and limitation ran from the latest acknowledgment of liability and payment. The appeal failed on limitation and was dismissed with costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2019 18:00:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=550992" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (12) TMI 716 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278016</link>
      <description>A seller-buyer account is not a mutual, open and current account unless the dealings create reciprocal, independent obligations on both sides; mere supplies by one side and payments by the other do not satisfy Article 1 of the Limitation Act, 1963. For a claim to the balance due on a running, non-mutual account, Article 14 does not apply because it is confined to suits for the price of goods sold and delivered where no fixed credit period is agreed. In the absence of a specific article, the residuary Article 113 governs, and limitation ran from the latest acknowledgment of liability and payment. The appeal failed on limitation and was dismissed with costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278016</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>