The plaintiff sued the Defendant for a sum of USD 41,919.00
as money lent and unpaid, interest thereon, and general damages. The Defendant
denied the claim and raised a preliminary objection that the suit was time
barred as such was not maintainable and asked for its dismissal with costs.
The plaintiff argued that the suit was not time barred because the
Defendant acknowledged the debt some three years after the debt was incurred
when, in a letter it assigned the debt to another person and copied the
assignment letter to the Plaintiff and, therefore, the suit was instituted
within the six years required under the Law of Limitation Act.