Abdul Qadeer v. Azamatullah Khan (1974) 1 An WR 98.

An acknowledgement of liability by a person liable to pay a debt saves limitation against him only and not against any others who are also liable to pay the debt. Mansa Ram & Sons v. Janki Dass Om Prakash AIR 1984 All 267. However, where a partner made earlier endorsements acknowledging debt for himself and on behalf of other partners and wherever he intended to represent the other partners he specified the same but in the last endorsement there was no such mention nor any power of attorney referred to, as regards last endorsement there could be no acknowledgment of liability of firm as required under Sections 18, 20 for the purpose of limitation in a suit for recovery of money borrowed by the firm. Musunuri Anjaneyulu v. Koona Lakshmi AIR 1998 AP 214 Sections 18 and 19 are very specific about the payment by a person or acknowledgement by a person, to mean that the period of limitation extends in so far as a person, pays or acknowledges the debt. The question is whether the expression 'person' used in the two provisions should be read as 'persons'. In cognate and contextual expression, the person should include persons to mean that to extend the period of limitation, the person or all the persons should pay or acknowledge. But the expression used therein is the person and that is being considered to know the legal effect. Thus, on a proper application of the correct legal decisions enunciated above, this Court should conclude that acknowledgment of a debt by one of the co-debtors or payment by one of them does not extend the period of limitation either under Section 18 or 19 of the Act. In this case, clearly Ex. A-2 did not give the benefit to the plaintiff to seek the extension of period of limitation as against the 2nd defendant.