JUDGMENT :- This second appeal raises a short but interesting question of law. The appellant who was the original defendant No. 1 and his two sons who were defendants 2 and 3 to the suit entered into a partnership with the respondent in respect of a business of taking forests on contract and the plaintiff-respondent filed the suit for dissolution and account of that partnership. It was common ground that the partnership was dissolved on 17th October 1947. The suit was filed on 11th June 1951 and one of the contentions raised on behalf of the defendants was that the suit was barred by limitation. Various issues were raised by the trial Court which held that defendant No. 3 was not a partner in the business and the partnership consisted of the plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2. The plaintiff in order to save the bar of limitation relied on a letter addressed by the first defendant to him on 22nd July 1949. In that letter there was a clear acknowledgment of liability made by the first defendant. Therefore, to the contention of the first defendant that the suit against him was barred by limitation, there was a complete answer furnished by this acknowledgment of liability which