Question

PRINCIPLE: Limitation bars the remedy, not the right.
FACTS: After the expiry of the period of limitation of three years, debtor Rohan makes a part payment of debt to creditor Sohan. Sohan then files a suit against Rohan for recovery of the debt after two years from the date of part payment. DECIDE:

• A. The part payment extends the period of limitation
• B. The suit is time barred as part payment is made after the expiry of period of limitation
• C. Fresh period of limitation begins from the date of part payment
• D. None of the above

Answer 1

The correct option is C Fresh period of limitation begins from the date of part payment

The legal Principle means that limitation bars the remedy, ie. the right to file a suit and the suit cannot be filed after the time has lapsed. This, however, does not mean that the right to recover is also barred. For instance, A advances loans to C in every six months and enters this entry into his Book of accounts.

Now, since the limitation to file a suit to a Civil Court lies within 3 years of the cause of action. So, A cannot file a suit for the first amount that was advanced by A to C as it is barred by the Limitation Act, but this doesn't mean that A does not have the right to recover the said amount from C. A will have the right to recover the amount of the first installment of C by any other means, for example, selling off the security advanced by C to A.

here, Rohan is the debtor and Sohan is the creditor.

Since the period of limitation has lapsed and the principle is silent as to whether a fresh period of limitation begins from the date of part payment.

Therefore, the suit is time-barred as part payment is made after the expiry of the period of limitation.