Acknowledgment in writing must refer to the entire claimed amount for limitation extension under S.18 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

1. The issue for consideration in this appeal is whether the appellant, M/s. Airen and Associates, would be entitled to the benefit of extended period of limitation under S.18 of the Limitation Act, 1963 ("Act of 1963", for short), for its entire suit claim.

2. The appellant undertook certain work for the respondent and claimed to have completed it on 07/02/1991. It then addressed notice dated 14/03/1992 to the respondent, raising a claim for Rs.3,07,115.85 (Rupees three lakhs seven thousand one hundred fifteen and eighty five paisa only). The respondent issued reply dated 21/05/1992 through an Advocate, stating that the contract value of the work itself was Rs.1,55,223/- (Rupees one lakh fifty five thousand two hundred twenty three only) and that a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) had already been paid to the appellant after certain deductions. The respondent, however, acknowledged that a sum of Rs.27,874.10 (Rupees twenty seven thousand eight hundred seventy four and ten paisa only) still remained due and payable to the appellant in full and final settlement of the contract price and stated its willingness to pay the said amount, without prejudice.

3. The appellant thereafter filed Civil Suit No. 21 - B / 1995 on 17/04/1995 before the learned District Judge, Durg, Chhattisgarh, for recovery of the sum of Rs.3,07,115.85 (Rupees three lakhs seven thousand one hundred fifteen and eighty five paisa only) along with interest thereon at the rate of 18% per annum from 01/04/1991, aggregating to Rs.5,28,238.89 (Rupees five lakhs twenty eight thousand two hundred thirty eight and eighty nine paisa only). This suit was dismissed, vide judgment and decree dated 08/12/2003. The learned District Judge held therein that the appellant was entitled to receive the sum of Rs.3,07,115.85 (Rupees three lakhs seven thousand one hundred fifteen and eighty five paisa only) along with interest thereon, but non - suited it on the ground that its suit was barred by limitation.

4. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant filed First Appeal No. 34/2004 before the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur. By the impugned judgment dated 12/06/2012, the High Court held in favour of the appellant insofar as the issue of limitation is concerned, by extending to it the benefit of S.18 of the Act of 1963, but holding to the effect that, in terms of the acknowledgment given by the respondent, the appellant would be entitled to recovery of only the acknowledged sum of Rs.27,874.10 (Rupees twenty seven thousand eight hundred seventy four and ten paisa only) along with interest thereon at the rate of 12% per annum from 01/04/1991 till the date of actual payment.

5. Aggrieved by such reduction of its claimed amount, the appellant is before this Court.

6. The facts having been set out hereinabove, the short point for consideration is whether the acknowledgment given by the respondent, under its legal notice dated 21/05/1992, would amount to an acknowledgment that would attract the extended period of limitation under S.18 of the Act of 1963 for the entire suit claim. S.18 of the Act of 1963 reads as follows: -
"18. Effect of acknowledgment in writing. - (1) Where, before the expiration of the prescribed period for a suit or application in respect of any property or right, an acknowledgment of liability in respect of such property or right has been made in writing signed by the party against whom such property or right is claimed, or by any person through whom he derives his title or liability, a fresh period of limitation shall be computed from the time when the acknowledgment was so signed.
(2) Where the writing containing the acknowledgment is