1. These Civil Revision Petitions, arising out of chit fund transactions, are between the same parties. The petitioner, who was the stake-holder, filed two suits against the respondents for recovery of defaulted future instalments in two chits. At the time of hearing of the suits, a question of limitation was raised for the first time, which was allowed to be argued by the lower court. The lower court has held that the suits were barred by limitation and in that view has dismissed the suits. The plaintiff petitioner seeks to reverse those decisions by these Civil Revision Petitions.

2. The suits were filed on 8th July 1959 after the termination of the chit funds on 8th December 1956. According to the respondents, the instalments payable on 8th June 1956 were defaulted and therefore the suits filed more than three years thereafter were barred by limitation. The learned advocate of the petitioner draws my attention to S.32 (1) of the Travancore Chitties Act of 1120. The sub-section provides that a foreman shall not be entitled to claim consolidated payment of all the future subscriptions from a defaulting prized subscriber unless he shall have demanded the same in writing.