https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456380 Article 36 of the Limitation Act is a residuary provision and applies only where no specific article governs. In claims for money wrongfully drawn from a bank account, the clerk handling withdrawals may be treated as the bank's agent within the scope of his authority, so neglect or misconduct can attract Article 90. Money may also be treated as specific movable property, bringing claims for wrongful taking or detention within Article 48. Where pleadings disclose collusion and nondisclosure amounting to fraud, Article 95 may apply as a suit for relief on the ground of fraud. On that analysis, the claims were not barred by limitation and the three-year period under Article 48, or alternatively Article 95, applied. en-us Wed, 05 Feb 1930 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Jul 2024 10:50:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456380 Article 36 of the Limitation Act is a residuary provision and applies only where no specific article governs. In claims for money wrongfully drawn from a bank account, the clerk handling withdrawals may be treated as the bank's agent within the scope of his authority, so neglect or misconduct can attract Article 90. Money may also be treated as specific movable property, bringing claims for wrongful taking or detention within Article 48. Where pleadings disclose collusion and nondisclosure amounting to fraud, Article 95 may apply as a suit for relief on the ground of fraud. On that analysis, the claims were not barred by limitation and the three-year period under Article 48, or alternatively Article 95, applied. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 05 Feb 1930 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456380