Skip to content


Natha Hira and anr. Vs. Janardhan Ramchandra and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectLimitation
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1877)ILR1Bom503
AppellantNatha Hira and anr.
RespondentJanardhan Ramchandra and anr.
Excerpt:
limitation - act ix of 1871--schedule ii, clause 72--promissory note--novation. - 1. we think that the transaction of the 8th december 1872 amounted to the substitution of a new contract for that contained in the promissory note of 14th april 1870, under which new contract the plaintiff's, in consideration of a payment of interest in advance up to the 1st april 1873, agreed to defer their demand for the principal, and to forbear to sue until that day. hence the period of limitation must be reckoned from that day, and the suit, having been brought on the 27th march 1876, is not barred. the verdict, therefore, should stand.
Judgment:

1. We think that the transaction of the 8th December 1872 amounted to the substitution of a new contract for that contained in the promissory note of 14th April 1870, under which new contract the plaintiff's, in consideration of a payment of interest in advance up to the 1st April 1873, agreed to defer their demand for the principal, and to forbear to sue until that day. Hence the period of limitation must be reckoned from that day, and the suit, having been brought on the 27th March 1876, is not barred. The verdict, therefore, should stand.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //