https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281793 A banking account operated first as a current deposit account and later under an agreed overdraft facility was treated as a mutual, open and current account because it involved reciprocal debits and credits on both sides, rather than a one-sided liability. That character was relevant for limitation under Article 85 of the Limitation Act. The subsequent winding up of the bank did not alter the account's nature for limitation purposes, since the liquidator succeeded to the bank's right to sue on the account. Section 45F of the Banking Companies Act, 1949 was applied to exclude the specified period from computation, so the liquidator's suit was within time. en-us Fri, 27 Nov 1959 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Jul 2019 18:14:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281793 A banking account operated first as a current deposit account and later under an agreed overdraft facility was treated as a mutual, open and current account because it involved reciprocal debits and credits on both sides, rather than a one-sided liability. That character was relevant for limitation under Article 85 of the Limitation Act. The subsequent winding up of the bank did not alter the account's nature for limitation purposes, since the liquidator succeeded to the bank's right to sue on the account. Section 45F of the Banking Companies Act, 1949 was applied to exclude the specified period from computation, so the liquidator's suit was within time. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 27 Nov 1959 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281793