AdvocateKhoj
Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library
    

Report No. 89

32.41. Case law on Article 24.- The Supreme Court has ruled1 that in order to attract Article 62 of the Act of 1908 (present Article 24), it is not necessary that at the moment of the receipt of money the defendant should have actually intended to receive it for the use of the plaintiff. As the same time, the article cannot apply if the right to refund does not arise immediately on receipt by the defendant, but arises only by reason of facts that transpire subsequently. The philosophy of the article is that the plaintiff has a cause of action for instituting the suit at the very moment of the receipt.

1. Venkata Subbarao v. State of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1965 SC 1773.

32.42. Case law.- The article in its actual operation has been held to encompass a variety of situations, such.-(i) co-shares,1 (ii) liability2 of the legal representative of a deceased person who has received the money, (iii) transferee of a decree,3 (iv) suits.4 by auction-purchaser for the refund of sale price when it is discovered that the judgment-debtor did not have a saleable interest (in the property), and (v) payment5 to benamidars.

1. Asharfi Kuor v. Ram Pearey, AIR 1939 All 442.

2. Ramheri v. Rohini Kanta, AIR 1922 Cal 499.

3. (a) Shanmughan v. Official Receiver, AIR 1938 Mad 532; (b) P. Malliah v. Brahmayya, AIR 1960 AP 89.

4. (a) Thakur Lal v. Nathulal, AIR 1964 Raj 140; (b) P. Malliah v. Brahmayya, AIR 1960 Al' 89.

5. Karanmurthi v. Ramanatha, AIR 1946 Mad 248 (FB).

32.43. No need to amend.- The case law on the article, extensive though it is, does not disclose any need for amending the article.

32.44. Article 25.- This takes us to Article 25 which reads as follows:

"For money payable for interest upon money due form the defendant to the plaintiff.

Three years.

When the interest becomes due."

The article is identical with Article 63 of the Acts of 1908 and 1877, and with Article 61 of the Act of 1871.

No change is needed in the article.

32.45. Article 26.- Article 26 reads as follows:

"For money payable to the plaintiff for money found to be due form the defendant of the plaintiff on accounts stated between them.

Three years.

When the accounts are stated in writing signed by the defendant of his agent duly authorised in this behalf unless where the debt is, by a simultaneous agreement in writing signed as aforesaid, made payable at a future time, and then when that time arrives."

It is identical with Article 64 of the Acts of 1908 and 1877. In the Act of 1871, Article 62 was as follow.-

"For money payable to the plaintiff for money found to be due form the defendant of the plaintiff on accounts stated between them.

Three years.

When the accounts are stated, unless where the debt is made payable at a future time and then when that time arrives."

No change is needed in the present article.

32.46. Article 27.- Article 27 reads as under:

"For compensation for breach of a promise to do anything at a specified time or upon the happening of a specified contingency.

Three years.

When the specified time arrives or the contingency happens."

It is identical with Article 65 of the Acts of 1908 and 1877.

Article 63 of the Act of 1871 was in the same terms, with slight verbal differences_

The present article seems to need no change.

32.47. Article 28.- Article 28 reads as follows:

"On a signal bond, where a day is specified for payment.

Three years.

The day to specified."

It is identical with Article 66 of the Acts of 1908 and 1877, and with Article 65 of the Act of 1871.

No change is needed in the article.

32.48. Article 29.- Article 29 reads as follows:

"On a signal bond, where no such day is specified.

Three years.

The day of executing the bond."

It is identical with Article 67 of the Acts of 1908 and 1877, and with Article 66 of the Act of 1871.

No change is needed in the article.

32.49. Article 30.- Article 30 reads as under:

"On a bond subject to a condition.

Three years.

When the condition is broken."

It is identical with Article 68 of the Acts of 1908 and 1877 and with Article 67 of the Act of 1871.

32.50. The concept of "Single bond".- Since the group or Articles (28, 29 and 30) deals with limitation for suits based on a bond, the use of the expression "single bond" occurring in Articles 28 and 29 needs some comment. The simple definition of "single bond" is that it is a bond merely for the payment of a certain sum of money, without any condition annexed to it.

But even Halsbury,1 while discussing "single bond", to fall back on Shakespeare and quote from "Merchant of Venice".2

"Go with me to a notary, seal me there your single bond, and, in a merry sport. In such a place, such sum or sums as are expressed in the condition, let the forfeit be...."

Halsbury comments that such instruments have become rare and the term "single bond" acquired various meanings, including a bond given by one obligor as distinguished from one given by two or more.

1. Halsbury's Laws of England, 4th Edn., para. 1386.

2. Merchant of Venice, Act 1, scene 3, lines 146, et seq.



The Limitation Act, 1963 Back




Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys