Alvarappa Pillal V. Perera

1933 Present: Garvin A.C.J. and Maartensz A.J.

ALVARAPPA PILLAI v. PERERA.

349-D. C. Colombo, 41,145.

Prescription-Claim for money lent-Assignment of claim-Meaning of " book debt"-Ordinance No. 22 of 1871, ss. 8 and 9.

A claim for money lent, which is prescribed in three years, does not become a book debt within the meaning of section 9 of the Prescription Ordinance merely because the transaction is entered in the books kept by the lender in the ordinary course of business.

APPEAL from a judgment of the District Judge of Colombo.

N. Nadarajah (with him J. E. Alles), for plaintiff, appellant.

No appearance for defendant, respondent.

Cur. adv. vult.

November 30, 1933. GARVIN A.C.J.-

This is an appeal by a plaintiff whose action was dismissed in the view that it was a claim to recover a book debt within the meaning of section 9 of Ordinance No. 22 of 1871, and as such barred by lapse of time.

The amount claimed was Rs. 650. Of this sum the District Judge has found that with the exception of Rs. 41.74 which represents the value of goods sold, the balance was money lent and advanced to the defendant by the firm of Arumugam Broth

Click Here to Read the rest of this document