<?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>1906 (5) TMI 2 - PRIVY COUNCIL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298992</link>
    <description>A signed statement in probate proceedings that accounts with the deceased were open and current was held to be a sufficient acknowledgment of liability under Section 19 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1877. The admission necessarily recognised that the accounts were subsisting and unsettled, and that liability would arise if a balance was found against the maker; an express promise to pay was not required. Qualifying words did not defeat the acknowledgment because they were consistent with liability being subject to later ascertainment of the balance. The acknowledgment, having been made before limitation expired, started a fresh period of limitation and the suit was within time.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 May 1906 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Nov 2021 11:02:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=662416" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1906 (5) TMI 2 - PRIVY COUNCIL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298992</link>
      <description>A signed statement in probate proceedings that accounts with the deceased were open and current was held to be a sufficient acknowledgment of liability under Section 19 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1877. The admission necessarily recognised that the accounts were subsisting and unsettled, and that liability would arise if a balance was found against the maker; an express promise to pay was not required. Qualifying words did not defeat the acknowledgment because they were consistent with liability being subject to later ascertainment of the balance. The acknowledgment, having been made before limitation expired, started a fresh period of limitation and the suit was within time.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 May 1906 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298992</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>