Effect of acknowledgment in writing
Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963 deals with effect of acknowledgment in writing. Where, before the expiration of the prescribed period for a suit or application in respect of 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 throu The Act came into force on 01 Jan 1964.
(1) Where, before the expiration of the prescribed period for a suit or application in respect of 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 derives 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 the acknowledgment 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 a 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 right,
(b) the word "signed" means signed either personally or by an agent duly authorised 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.
Section 18, The Limitation Act, 1963 (Act 36 of 1963).
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Referred to by 1
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Raman (dead) by L. R. S vs R. Natarajan
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A court cannot grant a decree for specific performance of a contract when the performance of the contract depends upon the defendant entering into an agreement with a third party who is not bound by the original contract and whose consent cannot be compelled by the court. Where a contract comprises interdependent parts and one part cannot be specifically enforced due to dependence on a third party's will, the other part also cannot be specifically enforced under Section 12(1) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, unless the exceptions in subsections (2), (3), or (4) apply.
On this section: The defendant raised the limitation defense based on Section 18(1), arguing that the fourth endorsement was made beyond three years from the third endorsement. However, the Supreme Court clarified that the relevant provision for specific performance is Article 54, not Section 18(1).
-
Deepak Mehta v. Yashi Multimedia Pvt. Ltd.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
HC Final Order order-1.pdf 2014-04-21 DATE VERIFIED. CS(OS) 869/2010. Rajiv Sahai Endlaw J. Isolates Limitation Act 18: an acknowledgment must be made in writing before the prescribed period expires (J.C. Budhraja); it must indicate a jural debtor-creditor relationship with intent to admit it (S.F. Mazda); and it must be clear, unambiguous, unequivocal and unconditional. Post-limitation emails, settlement negotiations, and a willingness to adjust an advance on fresh terms — especially emails disclaiming that they are a representation — are not s.18 acknowledgments. Map limitation-act 18 cited only. Do not invent CPC O7 R11 / O7 R6 (not in sections.csv).
On this section: Limitation Act 18 restarts time only on a clear, unconditional written acknowledgment made before limitation expires; later negotiations or emails that deny privity and disclaim being a representation do not save a time-barred suit (Deepak Mehta, Delhi HC). Do not invent CPC O7 R11.
-
Lalit Jasrajbhai Patel vs Jadhavlal Mavji Patel
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An admitted signature on a cheque triggers a statutory presumption of consideration under the NI Act, and such an instrument constitutes an 'acknowledgment in writing' under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, resetting the limitation period from the date of the instrument.
On this section: Acknowledgement in writing extends the limitation period.
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 18
What have the courts held on Section 18 of the Limitation Act?
Raman (dead) by L. R. S vs R. Natarajan (13 Sep 2022) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: The defendant raised the limitation defense based on Section 18(1), arguing that the fourth endorsement was made beyond three years from the third endorsement. However, the Supreme Court clarified that the relevant provision for specific performance is Article 54, not Section 18(1). Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below, 1 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2014 to 2023.
How do I find court cases under Section 18 of the Limitation Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: Limitation Act 18, section 18 Limitation Act, section 18 of the Limitation Act. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 3 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Raman (dead) by L. R. S vs R. Natarajan (13 Sep 2022).
What should I read with Section 18 of the Limitation Act, and has it changed?
1 other provision in this corpus refers back to it.
When did Section 18 of the Limitation Act come into force?
Section 18 of the Limitation Act, cited as Limitation Act 18, came into force on 01 Jan 1964, having been enacted on 05 Oct 1963. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 30. Provision for suits, etc., for which the prescribed period is shorter than the period prescribed by the Indian Limitation Act, 1908557 words
- 17. Effect of fraud or mistake401 words
- 2. Definitions363 words
- 15. Exclusion of time in certain other cases347 words
- 14. Exclusion of time of proceeding bona fide in court without jurisdiction312 words
- 6. Legal disability283 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 14 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.