Ramaswami, J.-This is an appeal preferred against the decree and judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge of Sivaganga in O.S. No. 29 of 1947.

The facts of this case have been fully set out in the judgment of the lower Court and need not be recapitulated because this appeal is confined only to E-Schedule moneys in regard to which the controversy is whether they were advanced by the plaintiff as deposits or loans which should be repaid only at the time of partition under an agreement pleaded or custom sought to be made out or under the general principles of Hindu Law as set out in two passages from Mayne and Ragha-vachari’s “Hindu Law” and the further question is whether recovery of these amounts is barred by limitation under Article 107 of the Indian Limitation Act.

The E-Schedule consists of three sub-schedules (a), (b) and (c) and the learned Subordinate Judge has given the following findings regarding them.

In regard to Schedule E (a) items 1 to 7, the learned Subordinate Judge states that it is quite probable that, as the plaintiff in his evidence states, he remitted moneys belonging to him. Items 1 to 6 of Schedule E(a) are moneys remitted by the plaintiff when he was employed a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document