DOMINGO JOHN PICARDO Vs. GREGORY PINTO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent sued the petitioner for the recovery of arrears of rent due in respect of a shop occupied by the petitioner. The respondent is employed abroad, and the rents were being collected on his behalf by a sister-in -law of his residing in Mangalore. The claim in the suit was for rents due in respect of the period from 1-1-1952 to 31-1-1958 after giving credit for two payments, one of Rs. 216/- in November 1957, and the other of Rs.72/- in February 1958, together with interest and other charges. The plaint claim came to Rs. 229-57. The suit has been decreed by the Court below.

(2.) The only point raised in this Revision petition is that in respect of the payment of Rs. 216/- in the month of November 1957, there had been an express appropriation by the paying debtor, the tenant, to the effect that the same was intended as payment of the rent for 3 years ending 31-12-1956. If this case of appropriation by the tenant is accepted, part of the claim in suit would he barred by limitation. The lower Court did not accept this argument.

(3.) The admitted facts on the basis of which this question of appropriation is raised are these: On 12-11-1957 the petitioner sent a money order for Rs. 216/- to the plaintiff 's sister-in-law at Mangalore which was received by her on 13-11-1957. Either at the same time or on the same day of the despatch of the money order, the petitioner wrote a letter Ex. B-5 dated 12-11-1957 to the plaintiff resident in Buserah which reached the Plaintff on the 19th of that month. In that letter the petitioner stated that : "I am sending Rs. 216/- towards the last three years rents ending on 31-12-1956 at the rate of Rs. 72/- per year for the shop and the small room attached to it. ........"