JESS RALPH Vs. MODERN SAVINGS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A question of limitation, of general application arising for frequent consideration is the substantial question of law involved in this second appeal. In particular, the scope of Art. 37 of the Limitation Act of 1963 arises for decision on the facts, hereinafter stated.

(2.) THE appellant is the 1st defendant. He joined a kuri, a chitty transaction conducted by the plaintiff. He received the amount from the plaintiff on 25-1-1971 on executing an agreement assuring the payment of future instalments. He continued to pay the future instalments till 15-11-1974. He then defaulted. He did not pay any further instalment. THE plaintiff filed the suit for the balance amount due from the date of default. THE suit was filed on 17-6-1978.

(3.) NOTICE was issued in the Second Appeal on the following questions: "as to whether in view of Ext. B1 notice, is it not art. 37, of the Limitation Act, 1963 that governs this case, and as to whether the obligee under Ext. Al has or has not waived the benefit of the provision as regards default-clause".