https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313344 A promissory note payable on demand was treated as a present debt, so limitation against the surety began from the date of the note when the surety's liability arose. The court held that section 20 of the Indian Limitation Act applies only when payment is made by the person liable for the particular debt or by a duly authorised agent. Because the principal debtor's and surety's liabilities are distinct for limitation purposes, payment of interest by the principal debtor did not, even with the surety's knowledge or consent, create a fresh period of limitation against the surety. Section 128 of the Indian Contract Act did not alter this position, and the suit against the surety was barred. en-us Sun, 21 Jan 1917 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Apr 2024 17:52:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313344 A promissory note payable on demand was treated as a present debt, so limitation against the surety began from the date of the note when the surety's liability arose. The court held that section 20 of the Indian Limitation Act applies only when payment is made by the person liable for the particular debt or by a duly authorised agent. Because the principal debtor's and surety's liabilities are distinct for limitation purposes, payment of interest by the principal debtor did not, even with the surety's knowledge or consent, create a fresh period of limitation against the surety. Section 128 of the Indian Contract Act did not alter this position, and the suit against the surety was barred. Case-Laws Indian Laws Sun, 21 Jan 1917 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313344