S RAMASWAMI PATTER Vs. TIRUCHA MANNADIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the lower Appellate Court no objection was taken to the finding that the suit was in time. Having regard to Kunhi Marakkar Haji v. Kutti Umma 20 M. 496 and Subbayya v. Rami Reddi 22 M. 344 the question of limitation argued in this Court, as it appeared to us, is that the point can be decided without remanding the case to the lower Appellate Court. We feel no hesitation in holding that the promise to remit the money in Exhibit B11 refers to the claim made under Exhibit G and to the further claim on account of renewal fees. We are not satisfied that Article 64 of the Limitation Act will cover this case. There has been no account in writing signed by the defendant. But we think that Exhibit B is an acknowledgment of liability and as such it saves the bar of limitation. IN this view, there is no other question to be decided.

(2.) WE dismiss the second appeal with costs.