Skip to main content

ACKNOWLEDGMENT / PART PAYMENTS EXTENDING LIMITATION

 Hello friends, today we will talk about few provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963 governing the extension of the time for instituting a case against the person who has committed default in court of law. Normally, the period of limitation in cases for recovery of money is 3 years from the date of accrual of cause of action. However, there are certain provisions mentioned in the limitation act where this period can be extended in certain peculiar circumstances as explained below:

Sec 18 of the Limitation Act

As per this provision, if there is an acknowledgment made in writing before the expiry of the prescribed period of limitation by the person against whom such right is claimed or by anyone upon his behalf, in such an event a fresh period of limitation is started to institute action. Thus, a suit for breach of contract may be filed even after expiry of prescribed period of 3 years in case it is accompanied by an acknowledgment in writing by the person against whom it is being filed.

Sec 19 of the Limitation Act

As per this provision, in cases where some part payment on account of principal debt or interest is being received by the creditor within the prescribed period of limitation, in such an event a fresh period of limitation is said to commence on the date of receiving such amount. In case a post dated cheque is given to the creditor for some part payment, in such an even the date written on the cheque is treated to be the date from which the fresh period of limitation shall begin afresh and not the date of handing over the cheque in question.

Sec 20 of the Limitation Act

As per this provision, in case the person who is liable to pay or give acknowledgment is under any disability or otherwise and he/she cannot act upon as the case may be , any other person, including his lawful guardian, manager, or an agent duly authorized can sign the acknowledgment as per Sec 18 of the Act, or make part payment on his behalf as contemplated under Sec 19 of the Act.

 

CONCLUSION

The part payment made or the acknowledgment made as contemplated in the above explained provisions does not amount to creation of new cause of action however it merely extends the present cause of action. Thus, these provisions only come into play only if the acknowledgment signed or part payment made as the case may be are made within the prescribed period of limitation originally governing the parties. The statement made between the parties in such an event must not therefore necessarily contain the original terms of the transactions, but must indicate the jural relation between the parties that being of the creditor and the debtor respectively.

 

I hope I have been clear in explaining the topic as mentioned above. For any query please write to us in comment section below.

Comments

  1. Kailash Madan17 July 2021 at 03:04

    Wakeelsaab, Thanks for enlightening us on Law of Limitations, which is very crucial when pursuing a suit by the parties. Regards, Kailash Madan, Mcom.LL.B, CAIIB,ACS

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

MARRIAGE REGISTRATION PROCESS IN DELHI

 Hello friends today we shall talk about the procedure for registration of marriage in Delhi.   ELIGIBILITY The marriage must have been solemnized either under the Hindu Marriage Act or under the Special Marriage Act, The Groom must have attained the minimum age of 21 years. The bride must be of the age of 18 years at least.   DOCUMENTS REQUIRED Photo ID proofs of both the parties like Aadhar card / PAN card / Voter card Date of birth proofs of both parties like 10 th certificate, etc. Permanent address proof must be there . Marriage photographs and Invitation Card. Passport Size Photographs of both parties. 2 witness in case marriage registered under Hindu Marriage Act or 3 witnesses in case it is registered under the Special Marriage Act along with their respective proofs like PAN CARD/ AADHAR CARD etc. An affidavit from both parties certifying the date of their marriage and more specifically stating that the marriage has not been performed between pers...
1 comment
Read more

BENGALURU CONSUMER COURT IMPOSES PENALTY ON FLIPKART

RECENTLY BENGALURU DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM DIRECTED ONLINE MERCHANT FLIPKART TO REFUND AN ANOUNT OF RS. 13,999/- ALONGWITH COMPENSATION OF RS. 10,000/- TO A 80-YEAR OLD FOR CAUSING MENTAL AGONY. BRIEF FACTS An 80 -Year Old Consumer ordered a treadmill on the online site of Opposite Party Flipkart. In compliance the treadmill was delivered to the consumer. At the time of installation of the product, it was revealed by the technician that the treadmill is faulty. On coming to know that the consumer returned the product to Flipkart and sought replacement. Initially Flipkart failed to replace the product but in some time, the replaced product was delivered to consumer, however, despite requests they failed to send the technician. When consumer tried to fix the same on its own, it was found that the product was of some other company. In other words, it was not the same product which has been initially ordered by the consumer. With no resolution, the consumer was left with no other option bu...
Post a Comment
Read more

KERALA HIGH COURT BARS ENTRY OF 10 YEAR GIRL FROM ENTERING SABARIMALA TEMPLE

RECENTLY KERALA HIGH COURT DISMISSED WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLE  226 OF CONSTITUTION FILED BY FATHER ON BEHALF OF HIS 10- YEAR OLD GIRL FOR SEEKING AN ORDER TO ENTER SABARIMALA TEMPLE. THE SAME IS DISMISSED IN LIGHT OF REVIEW PENDING ON THE SAID ISSUE BEFORE THE LARGER BENCH OF THE APEX COURT. BRIEF FACTS 10 year old girl filed a writ petition before the Kerala HIgh Court seeking relief of mandamus seeking directions to Travancore Devaswom Board to allow her to offer pilgrimage to Sabarimala Temple without taking into account the restrictions of age since she has not attained puberty or in the alternative to allow the request of the minor on sympathetic grounds. It is contended by the Petitioner that they are planning to visit the temple since long and it has been delayed due to onset of Covid earlier. Now, the family is under distress and also the father of Petitioner is not in good health. Hence, they have applied the same online but since in the meanwhile the age of Petit...
Post a Comment
Read more