Khan Bahadur Shapoor Fredoom Mazda v. Durga Prosad Chamaria

Facts

A creditor sought to recover a debt and relied on a written statement made by the debtor as an acknowledgment of liability to extend limitation. The writing did not expressly admit a specified sum or promise to pay, but indicated a subsisting liability. The question was whether such a statement amounted to a valid acknowledgment under Section 19 of the Limitation Act, 1908.

Issues

• What constitutes a valid acknowledgment of liability under Section 19 of the Limitation Act, 1908 (now Section 18 of the 1963 Act).
• Whether an acknowledgment must be express, specify the precise amount, or contain a promise to pay to attract a fresh period of limitation.

Arguments

The creditor argued that the writing showed a clear admission of a subsisting debtor-creditor relationship and was a sufficient acknowledgment to furnish a fresh starting point of limitation. The debtor contended that the statement was too vague, did not admit a definite sum or promise to pay, and could not operate as an acknowledgment.

Held

The Supreme Court culled out the principles governing acknowledgment under Section 19. It held that a statement, to amount to an acknowledgment, must involve an admission of a subsisting jural relationship of debtor and creditor and an intention to admit that relationship, but the admission need not be express. It may be inferred from the words used and the surrounding circumstances, even where accompanied by a refusal to pay or a claim of set-off, and need not specify the exact amount or contain an express promise. Acknowledgment merely renews the debt and furnishes a fresh period of limitation; it does not create a new contract.

Ratio decidendi

An acknowledgment under Section 18 (then Section 19) requires an admission, express or implied, of a subsisting liability or jural relationship; it need not state the precise amount or promise payment, and once made it furnishes a fresh starting point for limitation.

Significance

The classic and most-cited Supreme Court exposition of what constitutes a valid acknowledgment under the Limitation Act, defining the threshold for Section 18. Universally relied upon to determine whether a writing extends limitation, including in commercial, recovery and insolvency contexts.

Related