IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. ORDER 27.2.2008. S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.476/1994 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DALIP SINGH Shri Alok Garg, for the appellant. Shri R.P. Garg, for the respondent. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The appeal has been preferred against the order dated 9.2.1994 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No.3, Jaipur city, Jaipur who dismissed the application filed by the R.F.C. under Section 31 of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 on the ground that the application was barred by limitation. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that in the instant case the last date of payment was 3.3.1989 and as such even as per the aforesaid case the application could have been filed within a period of three years from the aforesaid date. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that in the instant case after the payment fell due the vehicle which was hypothecated with the appellant was taken possession of on 22.9.1989 and sold by way of auction on 14.6.1991. It is submitted that after auction on 14.6.1991 a sum of Rs.97,000/- which was realized was credited to the account of the respondent and after adjustment of the aforesaid sum an amount of Rs.2.19 lacs and odd remained outstanding. It is therefore contended that the period of limitation stood extended on account of the aforesaid payment being received from the auction sale of the property of the respondent on 14.6.1991 in terms of Section 19 of the Limitation Act, 1963. In view of the above it is submitted that the application which was filed on 1.7.1992 was filed before expiry of period of 3 years from the date of receipt of the payment i.e. 14.6.1991 which extended upto 13.6.1994. The submission of the learned counsel for the respondent on the other hand is that the last installment was due on 3.3.1989 and the application under Section 31 was required to be filed within a period of 3 years from the said date i.e. upto 3.3.1992. Consequently the application which was submitted on 1.7.1992 was beyond the period of limitation and as such the same has rightly been dismissed by the learned courts below. I have considered the submission made at the bar it is not in dispute that the vehicle in question was taken possession of by the appellant on 22.9.1989 i.e. before the period of limitation expired as per the respondent on 3.3.1992and was sold and the amount of Rs.70,000/- which was received by way of sale proceeds was credited to the account of borrower respondent on 14.6.1991 which was also prior to the last date for filing of the application which was stated to be as 3.3.1992. In view of the fact of having received the payment towards the debt by the borrower, by way of sale proceed on 14.6.1991, by virtue of provisions contained in Section 19 read with Section 20 of the Limitation Act, 1963 the period of limitation was to be counted w.e.f. the date on which the payment was received by the appellant i.e. on 14.6.1991 and the same stood extended for a period of three years from 14.6.1991. The application having been filed within a period of 3 years from 14.6.1991 i.e. on 1.7.1992, the same is within the period of limitation. In view of the above the impugned order dated 9.2.1994 deserves to be set aside and it is held that the application filed by the appellant was within limitation. The impugned order is set aside. The matter is now remitted to the learned trial court to decide the application on merits in accordance with law. (DALIP SINGH),J. Ramchandrkhatri,PS