Walsh, J.

1. The suit was for Rupees 974-1-11 being the principal and interest due by the defendant on account of dealings carried on with plaintiff from January 1917 to. 22nd August 1926 on which date the balance was struck. To save limitation the plaintiff relied on an entry by the defendant dated 22nd August 1926 in plaintiffs account book which runs as follows. "This sum of; Rs. 800-11-3 will be paid by me immediately." The debt was denied and various defences raised, but the suit was dismissed on the preliminary point that the entry relied on to save limitation being a pronote and not being stamped, was inadmissible and hence the suit was-barred by limitation. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against that order. The learned Subordinate Judge has also discussed the contention that the entry is an acknowledgment under Article 1, Schedule 1, Stamp Act. 1 agree with him that the proviso to that article clearly takes this entry out of that definition. He has, however, held that it is a pronote but he has failed to deal: with the point raised before me that the j payee is not named. The two cases; which he quotes, Muthu Sastrigal v. Viswanatha Pandara Sannadhi AIR