9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (11) TMI 603X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... um of ₹ 20,025/- which the respondent company has not paid. The averments in respect of transactions are made in para VI of the petition and the manner in which balance of ₹ 20,025/- is shown is reproduced as below:- Date Particulars Debit Credit Balance 01.0496 Opening Balance 25,125.00 9.4.96 To bill No. 2205 1,260.00 10.4.96 To Bill No. 2208 1,510.00 12.04.96 To Bill No. 2211 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clear that the last payment was made on 17th April, 1996. However, the present petition was filed on 26th November, 1999. It is admittedly beyond three years of the said transaction which is the limitation period prescribed under the Limitation Act even if the petitioner relies upon the Balance Sheet of the respondent, that is for the year ending 31st March, 1996. However, counsel for the petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Section 18 of the Limitation Act. The Supreme Court in the case of Valliamma Champaka Pillai v. Sivathanu Pillai and Ors. held that : ''Under Section 18 of Limitation Act, 1908, one of the essential requirements for a valid `acknowledgment' is that the writing concerned must contain an admission of a `subsisting liability'. A mere admission of the past liability is not suff ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the auditors of the debt existing even on 27.11.1996 as well. This position would become obvious by giving an illustration. If the position of debtors and of creditors undergo change after 31.3.96 and before 27.11.1996, that would not be reflected in the balance sheet and such change would appear only in the balance sheet as on 31st March, 1997. Thus, say for example, a particular creditor was p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
