DAVE, C.J.—This appeal came for hearing before a learned Single Judge of this Court on 23.10.64, but since an important question of law relating to the period of limitation was involved, he referred it to the Chief Justice to be laid before a Division Bench of the Court. This is how the case has come before us for hearing.

2. The appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of the District Judge, Balotra, dated 30.1.59, modifying the decree of Civil Judge, Jalore, dated 31.5.58, The plaintiffs-respondents filed a suit for the recovery of Rs. 8,221 /-as principal and Rs. 1,479/- as interest, in all for Rs. 9,700/- on the basis of their account books which were said to have been signed by the defendants. It was averred that the defendants Ganeshmal and his son Amar Chand had dealings with the plaintiffs father for a number of years. After settling their accounts the defendants admitted their liability to pay an outstanding debt of Rs. 8,901/- and executed a Khata on 14.2.51. After certain payments, the account between the parties was again settled on Kati Sud 15, Samvat 2010, and a balance of Rs, 8,221/- was found outstanding against them. They again executed a Khata for the sai

Click Here to Read the rest of this document