AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Arnold White, C.J.
1.The receipt, which is relied on by the plaintiff, Ex. A2, is, (assuming the maistry had authority to give the receipt) on the authority of Kadiri
Pakirappa v. Manki Husan Sahib 19 M.L.J. 650 : 6 M.L.T. 155 : 3 Ind. Cas. 1, an acknowledgment of liability within the meaning of Section 19
of the Limitation Act. There is no reference to this receipt in the judgment and it is not set up in the plaint as a ground of exemption from limitation--
the case made in the plaint being that the defendant was liable on a settlement of account. Apparently this settlement was found against. I do not
think, however, the plaintiff ought to be shut out from asking for the price of goods delivered. On payment of the costs of the petition to this Court
in any event, he may amend his plaint, by setting up as a ground of exemption from the law of limitation, the receipt of the 19th December 1904
(Ex. A2) and the case will be restored to the file of the Subordinate Judge. The other costs will abide the event.