https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310005 A chit recovery suit was held barred by limitation because the contractual acceleration clause made the prized subscriber liable for the consolidated future subscriptions and defaulted instalments after three consecutive defaults. Limitation was held to begin when the third default was completed and the consolidated liability arose, not from the later termination of the chit agreement. On the admitted facts, the default had continued uninterruptedly from 10-04-2001, so the right to sue accrued on expiry of the three-month default period. The contrary argument that time ran only from termination was rejected, and the earlier view governing such recovery suits was followed. en-us Wed, 05 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Oct 2023 08:40:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310005 A chit recovery suit was held barred by limitation because the contractual acceleration clause made the prized subscriber liable for the consolidated future subscriptions and defaulted instalments after three consecutive defaults. Limitation was held to begin when the third default was completed and the consolidated liability arose, not from the later termination of the chit agreement. On the admitted facts, the default had continued uninterruptedly from 10-04-2001, so the right to sue accrued on expiry of the three-month default period. The contrary argument that time ran only from termination was rejected, and the earlier view governing such recovery suits was followed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 05 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310005