Section 17 of Limitation Act "Effect of fraud or mistake"
(1) Where, in the case of any suit or application for
which a period of limitation is prescribed by this Act-
a. the suit or application is based upon the fraud of the
defendant or respondent or his agent; or
b. the knowledge of the right or title on which a suit or
application is founded is concealed by the fraud of any such
person as aforesaid; or
c. the suit or application is for relief from the
consequences of a mistake; or
d. where any document necessary to establish the right of
the plaintiff or applicant has been fraudulently concealed
from him;
the period of limitation
shall not begin to run until the plaintiff or applicant
has discovered the fraud or the mistake or could, with
reasonable diligence, has discovered it, or in the case
of concealed document, until the plaintiff or the
applicant first had the means of producing the concealed
document or compelling its production:
Provided that nothing in this section shall enable any
suit to be instituted or application to be made to
recover or enforce any charge against or set aside any
transaction affecting, any property which-
i. in the case of fraud, has been purchased for valuable
consideration by a person who was not a party to the fraud
and did not at the time of the purchase know, or have reason
to believe, that any fraud had been committed, or
ii. in the case of mistake, has been purchased for valuable
consideration subsequently to the transaction in which the
mistake was made, by a person who did not know, or have
reason to believe, that the mistake had been made, or
iii. in the case of a concealed document, has been purchased
for valuable consideration by a person who was not a party
to the concealment and, did not at the time of purchase
know, or have reason to believe, that the document had been
concealed.
(2) Where a judgment-debtor has, by fraud or force,
prevented the execution of a decree or order within the
period of limitation, the court may, on the application of
the judgment-creditor made after the expiry of the said
period extend the period for execution of the decree or
order:
Provided that such application is made within one year from
the date of the discovery of the fraud or the cessation of
force, as the case may be.
Section 18
of Limitation Act "Effect of acknowledgment in writing"
(1) Where before the expiration of the prescribed period for
a suit or application in respect or 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 derived 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 thee acknowledgement is
undated, oral evidence may be given of the time when it was
signed; but subject to the provisions of the Indian Evidence
Act,1872 ( 1 of 1872), oral evidence of its contents shall
not be received.
Explanation - For the purposes of this section, -
a. an acknowledgment may be sufficient though it omits to
specify the exact nature of the property or right, or avers
that the time for payment, delivery, performance or
enjoyment has not yet come or is accompanied by refusal to
pay, deliver, perform or permit to enjoy, or is coupled with
a claim to set-off, or is addressed to a person other than a
person entitled to the property or ornight;
b. the word "signed" means signed either personally or by an
agent duly Authorized in this behalf ; and
c. an application for the execution of a decree or order
shall not be deemed to be an application in respect of any
property or right.
NOTES - It is not necessary that an acknowledgment within
Section 18 must contain a promise pay or should amount to a
promise to pay. (Subbarsadya v.Narashimha, AIR 1936 Mad.939)
The above section corresponds to S.19 of the old Act and
makes slight changes.