Shambhu Prasad Singh, J.

1. In this second appeal by defendant No. 1, the only question which arises for decision is whether the entire claim made by plaintiff-Respondent No. 1 was within time or part of it was barred. Respondent No. 1 is a factory, situate within the limits of the Patna Municipal Corporation, the appellant. Its case was that though there was no water hydrant or any scheme for water supply in the area concerned, the appellant served a demand notice on it for payment of water tax. Respondent No. 1 pointed out to the office-bearers and employees of the appellant that it was not liable to pay any water tax, but they did not appreciate the legal position and realised water tax from Respondent No. 1. For the water tax illegally realised from Respondent No. 1 for the period uptill fourth quarter of 1955-56, it instituted Title Suit No. 158 of 1956 in the Court of Munsif 1st at Patna. The suit was decreed by the trial Court and the decree was affirmed by the first appellate Court as well as by this Court where a second appeal was filed. Even during the pendency of the suit, the appellant went on realising water tax illegally from Respondent No. 1 and hence the pre