HASTI MAL Vs. SHANKER DAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference by a Division Bench of this Court and raises certain important questions.

(2.) THE appellant sued the respondent for recovery of a sum of Rs. 700/- on the basis of a 'Khata' dated 'Chait Sudi' 12, 'Samwat' 1925. THE defendant pleaded, 'inter alia', that the document was a mere acknowledgment and could not form the basis of the suit THE trial Court accepted the defence and dismissed the suit, and the same judgment was upheld on appeal. THE second appeal came up for hearing before a Single Judge of this Court, who referred the question "Whether acknowledgment of a previous debt not ba Ted by limitation could be the basis of a suit?" to a Division Bench. In the meanwhile, the same question came up for decision in 'Kanraj v. Vijey Singh', 1950 R L W 234 before another Division Bench, and it was held that : "An acknowledgment of liability only allowed extension of limitation if made before expiration of the period of limitation but did not create a new right. It did not operate as a new contract but only kept alive the original cause of action and consequently it could not form an independent cause of action or a basis for a suit."