VADAKKEKARA HINDU MATHA DHARMA PARIPALANA SABHA Vs. IBRAHIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Bavunny and others, whose legal representatives are defendants 1 to 10, had excelled a chitty security bond, evidenced by Ext. P 1 dated 12-9-1112, in favour of the plaintiff, the foreman of the chitty and the suit is to enforce the bond in regard to the subscriptions defaulted from the 26th instalment of the chitty. The suit lands are the securities under that bond Several contentions raised in defence, viz., discharge, merger of the case of action in a prior decree on the same bond, and competency of the plaintiff to sue, have all been overruled by the court below and no objection is taken thereto by the respondents here. The court below however dismissed the suit as been beyond limitation and that finding is in challenge in this appeal by the plaintiff.

(2.) The suit is for the entirety of the defaulted subscriptions. The chitty terminated in Edavam 1130 and this suit has been instituted on 15-8-1131 M. E. (28-3-1956.) Admittedly, the date of the 26th instalment, the commencement of default, was 15-5-1114; and the plaintiff's notice demanding the entire future subscriptions in a lump was on 31-11-1120. The plaintiff counted limitation from the date of his written demand (31-11-1120); but the court below held it to have started on the date of the first default and therefore the suit instituted beyond 12 years thereof barred.

(3.) S.27 of the Travancore Chitties Act, III of 1094, which is the law governing the Chitty which gave rise to this suit, read as follows: