Solomon Selvaraj vs Indirani Bhagawan Singh

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(SC) 1204

M. R. SHAH, M. M. SUNDRESH
Solomon Selvaraj – Appellant
Versus
Indirani Bhagawan Singh – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mrs. V. Mohana, Sr. Adv. Mr. B. Ragunath, Adv. Mrs. N. C. Kavitha, Adv. Sriram P., AOR Ms. Sneha Botwe, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. V.Parthiban, Adv Mr. N.Vijayraghavan, Adv Mr. P.B. Suresh, Adv. Mr. Vipin Nair, AOR Mr. Karthik Jayshankar, Adv. Mr. Arindam Ghosh, Adv. Mr. Vinayak Mishra, Adv.

Judgement Key Points

What is the procedure for rejecting an application to sue as an indigent person under Order 33 CPC and the consequences for such rejection? What is the remedy or effect when an application to sue as an indigent person is rejected but the applicant subsequently pays court-fee; is the suit deemed instituted from the date of the application? What are the circumstances under which a court may deem the suit as instituted despite the rejection of the indigent-suit application and how do res judicata or lack of cause of action interact with such orders?

What is the procedure for rejecting an application to sue as an indigent person under Order 33 CPC and the consequences for such rejection?

What is the remedy or effect when an application to sue as an indigent person is rejected but the applicant subsequently pays court-fee; is the suit deemed instituted from the date of the application?

What are the circumstances under which a court may deem the suit as instituted despite the rejection of the indigent-suit application and how do res judicata or lack of cause of action interact with such orders?

JUDGMENT :

M.R. SHAH, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 28.01.2022 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in CMA No.38 of 2021 by which the High Court has dismissed the said Miscellaneous Appeal and has confirmed the order passed by the learned Trial Court rejecting an application filed by the appellants herein seeking leave to file the suit as indigent persons, the original applicants – plaintiffs have preferred the present appeal.

2. That the appellants herein -original plaintiffs instituted the suit before the learned Trial Court for declaration of title and for recovery of possession. In the said suit the plaintiffs filed an application being I.O.P. No.1 of 2015 permitting them to file the suit as indigent persons. The said application was opposed by the defendants on the grounds inter alia that the suit is barred by res judicata; there is no cause of action for filing the suit. The claim of the plaintiffs that they are indigent persons was also contested. The learned Trial Court rejected the said application filed by the appellants seeking leave to file the suit as indigent persons. The order passed by the learned Trial

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2022 Supreme(SC) 1204

M. R. SHAH, M. M. SUNDRESHSolomon Selvaraj – AppellantVersusIndirani Bhagawan Singh – Respondent

What is the procedure for rejecting an application to sue as an indigent person under Order 33 CPC and the consequences for such rejection?

What is the remedy or effect when an application to sue as an indigent person is rejected but the applicant subsequently pays court-fee; is the suit deemed instituted from the date of the application?

What are the circumstances under which a court may deem the suit as instituted despite the rejection of the indigent-suit application and how do res judicata or lack of cause of action interact with such orders?

Cases Referred (1)

M. R. SHAH, M. M. SUNDRESH
Solomon Selvaraj – Appellant
Versus
Indirani Bhagawan Singh – Respondent