https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287715 The appellate court set aside the trial court's judgment that dismissed the suit based on limitation grounds. It emphasized the need for acknowledgment of payment to save limitation under Section 19 of the Limitation Act. The court found that the payment through money order constituted both a payment within the limitation period and an acknowledgment of the debt due, contrary to the lower court's ruling. The judgment allowed the civil revision petition with costs, highlighting the significance of the acknowledgment in determining the timeliness of the suit. en-us Fri, 28 Mar 1969 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Apr 2020 11:01:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287715 The appellate court set aside the trial court's judgment that dismissed the suit based on limitation grounds. It emphasized the need for acknowledgment of payment to save limitation under Section 19 of the Limitation Act. The court found that the payment through money order constituted both a payment within the limitation period and an acknowledgment of the debt due, contrary to the lower court's ruling. The judgment allowed the civil revision petition with costs, highlighting the significance of the acknowledgment in determining the timeliness of the suit. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 28 Mar 1969 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287715