This case involves an interpretation of section 13 of the Indian Limitation Act and was referred by Satyanarayana Rao and Rajagopalan, JJ., to a Full Bench because they were of opinion that the decision in Rathina Tevan v. Packirisami Tevan1 on the authority of which the case was disposed of in the Courts below required reconsideration.

The suit which was filed in the Court of the District Munsif of Paramakudi was for the recovery from two defendants of a sum of Rs.1,466-10-4 alleged to be due on account of dealings had by the defendants with the plaintiff’s shop from 23rd August, 1941 to 18th October, 1941, at Rangoon. The suit was filed in 1946

It was stated in the plaint that the suit claim was not barred because the defendants had all alone been in Rangoon and the 2nd defendant alone had returned to India two months prior to the suit, the 1st defendant still remaining in Burma. The 1st defendant allowed the suit to proceed ex parte. The 2nd defendant filed a written statement admitting the dealings but pleading that the entire amount due to the plaintiff had been paid. He also took the further plea that the suit was barred by limitation. The two main issues frame