In which of the following cases it was held that while it is not necessary that the written acknowle...........

Limitation Act (LA) 1963 Limitation of Suits etc

In which of the following cases, it was held that while it is not necessary that the written acknowledgment should be made prior to the expiry of limitation period, it is essential that such acknowledgment whether made before or after the limitation period should be in existence prior to the institution of the suit:

Sant Lal v Kamla Prasad.

Baiakrishna v Shree D. M Sansthan.

Jokhan Rai v Baikunth Singh.

None of the above.

छोटे Courses बड़े Results

Master Limitation of Suits etc

Prepare through Micro-courses

Try Now

Explanation:

Sant Lal v Kamla Prasad.
CITATION:
1951 AIR 477 1952 SCR 116

'But while it is not necessary that the written acknowl- edgment should be made prior to the expiry of the period of limitation, it is, in our opinion, essential that such acknowledgment, whether made before or after the period of limitation, must be in existence prior to the institution of the suit. Whether a suit is time-barred or not has got to be determined exclusively with reference to the date on which the plaint is filed and the allegations made therein.'