Imtiaz-Un-Nissa Bibi vs Masih-Un-Din

Henry Richard, C.J. and Pramada Charan Banerji, J.—This appeal is connected with First Appeal No. 104 of 1912 in which we have just now delivered judgement. The facts are stated in out judgement in the connected, appeal, and the only difference between the cases is that a plea of limitation has been taken in the present case. It is contended on behalf of the defendant that the suit is barred by article 62 of the first schedule to the Limitation Act in so far as the case relates to a claim against him for money realized by him. In our opinion under the circumstances of the present case the plaintiff was only entitled to recover under the form of action known as a claim for " money had and received by the defendant for the use of the plaintiff.'''' The last item realized by the defendant was realized as far back as the year 1908. The present suit was not instituted until February, 1912, that is to say more than three years after the latest item was received. In our opinion the suit is barred under article 62. We accordingly allow the appeal, set aside the decree of the court below, and dismiss the suit, as against the appellant, with costs.