Judgment :- 1. Appellants are the defendants in O.S. 486 of 1978 of the First Additional Sub Court, Ernakulam. Plaintiff (respondent herein) filed the suit to recover money on the strength of a chitty agreement. 1st defendant contended inter-alia that Rs. 11,000/- is due to him as the plaintiff had obtained loans from him on two occasions as evidenced by Exts. B1 and B2 and so the plaintiff is not entitled to the suit claim. Learned Sub Judge decreed the suit over-ruling the above contention. 2. The learned Sub Judge held that the 1st defendant has not paid court fees on the plea of set off and so he cannot legally sustain the claim. Contention of the 1st defendant is that amount evidenced by Exts. B1 and B2 will have to be adjusted towards the plaint claim and therefore no court fee need be paid by him. In a case where a plea could be taken as a plea of adjustment, no court fee is payable. But in a case of set off or counter claim court fee will have to be paid. S.8 of the Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act provides that a written statement pleading a set off or counter claim shall be chargeable with fee in the same manner as in a plaint. 3. Set off is a plea open to a defendant by which he could claim wiping off or reducing the plaint claim by adjustment of the amount due to him from the plaintiff. A plea of set off is distinguishable from a plea of payment of adjustment. Set off extinguishes the debt or reduces the same. Payment of adjustment refers to a satisfaction or extinguishment of a debt effected prior to the raising of defence in the written statement. The question of set off can arise only in respect of dues which are outstanding and which have not already been adjusted. Thus, a plea of payment or adjustment is definitely and essentially a different plea and can be pressed into service only if the same was raised before the institution of the suit and not afterwards. To determine whether a plea raised in defence is a plea of set off or of payment by adjustment it has to be ascertained as to whether a separate action could be maintained by the defendant on the basis of his claim. To determine whether a plea raised in defence is a plea of set off or of payment by adjustment it has to be ascertained as to whether a separate action could be maintained by the defendant on the basis of his claim. If he could institute a separate suit for realisation of the amount due to him, it is a case of set off. If the adjustment was made prior to the filing of the suit by the plaintiff and a plea is taken to that effect, it would be a plea of adjustment by payment. In such a case no court fee would be payable on the amount as it stood adjusted prior to the institution of suit. As a plea of set off is pleaded in the written statement and not a claim for rendition of accounts or a plea of payment by adjustment, the 1st defendant cannot contend that he has no liability to pay court fees. 4. The learned Sub Judge also found that there is no acceptable evidence to hold that Rs. 11,000/- was in fact paid by the 1st defendant to the plaintiff. Exts. B1 and B2 are letters sent by the plaintiff to the 1st defendant, requesting loan of Rs. 7,000/- and Rs. 4,000/-. Apart from Exts. B1 and B2 there is no evidence to hold that the 1st defendant had ever paid the amount mentioned in Exts. B1 and B2. As there is total lack of evidence to prove the payment of Rs. 11,000/- as contended by the 1st defendant, the learned Sub judge was correct in holding that the 1st defendant has failed to prove to the satisfaction of the court about the payment of Rs. 11,000/- to the plaintiff. 5. Another question to be considered is whether it would be open to a defendant to claim set off or counter claim if such claim is barred by limitation at the time when the plaintiff has filed the suit against him. Ext.Bl is dated 26-6-1975 and Ext.B2 is dated 21-8-1975. The suit was filed by the plaintiff on 13-12-978. By the time the suit was filed the period of limitation has run out for any claim to be made on the strength of Exts.Bl and B2. Ext.Bl is dated 26-6-1975 and Ext.B2 is dated 21-8-1975. The suit was filed by the plaintiff on 13-12-978. By the time the suit was filed the period of limitation has run out for any claim to be made on the strength of Exts.Bl and B2. In a suit where the plaintiff claims certain amount from the defendant, the latter cannot successfully advance a plea of set off or counter claim if that plea is barred by limitation. Even if it is assumed that the plaintiff owed Rs. 11,000/- as evidenced by Exts.B1 and B2, the 1st defendant cannot legally enforce his claim against the plaintiff as his claim is barred by limitation when the plaintiff filed suit against him. 6. The learned Sub Judge was justified in decreeing the suit in favour of the plaintiff over-ruling the contentions of the defendants. We hardly find any reason to interfere. The judgment and decree of the trial court are hereby confirmed. The Appeal is dismissed with costs.