Kamat, J.

This appeal is referred to us to consider the correctness of the decision of this court (Moidu v. Kerala State Electricity Board (1980 KLT 817)), in regard to the application of S.18 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The decision relates to a situation when a person makes admission of acknowledgement does not specify the quantum of liability whether it would operate as an acknowledgement in respect of specific sum. In other words when an acknowledgement relates to the part of the claim which is not specified, whether, without anything more, it would be available as an acknowledgement to save limitation under S.18 of the Limitation Act.

2. In the reference order, are referred certain other decisions:

i) Harrison & Crossfield Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1963 KLT 215).

ii) The decision of the Privy Council in Maniram v. Seth Rupchand (331a.165)

iii) Sitayya v. Rangareddi (I.L.R 10 Mad. 259)

iv) Jainaram v. Governor-General of India (A.I.R 1951 Cal. 462)

v) Krishna Kuruppu v. Raman Filial (XL TLR 200)

that are specifically referred to in the earlier decision of this Court-1963 K.L.T 215. We will have to consider the scope and application of S.18 of the Limitation Act, obviously in relation to the facts of the present appeal.

3. The unsuccessful plaintiff has approached this Court in appeal, broadly, on the following averments:

i) The appellant/ plaintiff was carrying on business on giving on hire, steel folding chairs, steel folding tables etc. One Shri K.S. Menon, the husband of the first defendant and the father of the second defendant was the Proprietor of a circus - "Bharat Circus", during all over the country attracting large crowds at the various camps.

ii) During the period from September 1, 1976, when the circus was camping at the Municipal stadium, Nagercoil, plaintiff was approached by K.S. Menon and his Manager with a request for the supply of 1000 steel chairs for hire, during the camp of the circus at Nagercoil. This was on a long term basis for use of the said chairs not only at this camp, but also in the neighbouring States of Kerala, Mysore and Andhra Pradesh. This was agreed at the rate of 10 paise per chair per day. Subsequently a regular agreement (Ext. A5) was entered into between the parties commencing on May 6,1977.

iii) The following are the terms of the said agreement as reproduced in the averments of the plaint:

i) The plaintiff shall supply 1000 (one thousand) chairs to the Bharat Circus during its camp at Nagercoil.

ii) The chairs shall be used by the company till the last day of its camp at Nagercoil and thereafter the chairs shall'be taken and used by the Circus Company at its succeeding camps.

iii) If the Company required more chairs in any of the succeeding camps in bigger towns, the plaintiff shall supply such number of chairs as and when required.

iv) The Company shall pay hire charges at the rate of 10 paise per chair per day for all the chairs supplied by the plaintiff.

v) The company need not pay hire charges for the chairs during the period of their transport from one camp to another. Normally there would be an interval of 3 days between one camp and the next.

vi) The company would return to the plaintiff those chairs which got damaged or required repairs or repainting. If and when the Company required replacement of the old chairs in their use by a completely new set of chairs the plaintiff shall do so, and the company shall bear the transporting charges therefor.

vii) The Company shall bear the expenses for transporting the chairs from one camp to the next.

viii) Whenever the company returned the chairs, if there was any shortage in the number of chairs, the Company would pay the value of the chairs which were not returned.

iv) On the basis of other agreement, from October, 1976 the circus toured several times, when on May 13, 1979 there was a camp at Coimbatore. There after the circus came to Palayamcottah in Tirunelveli and had shows at the said place from September 17, 1982 upto October 24, 1982.