SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1976 Supreme(AP) 109

A.SAMBASIVA RAO
Navadu Nuka Raju – Appellant
Versus
Rajani China Appanna – Respondent


A. SAMBASIVA RAO, J.

( 1 ) A point of some import is raised in this revision petition. It relates to applications for leave to file suit in forma pauperis. The question is whether a duty is cast on an applicant for such leave to disclose all the properties belonging to him in his application and if he does not, whether such non-disclosure would entail dismissal of his application.

( 2 ) THE material facts are :the petitioner filed a suit for eviction of the respondents from certain properties and for delivering the same to him. He filed an application to file the suit in forma pauperis and in the B Schedule appended to the petition he had shown half joint share in a thatched house worth about Rs. 500. 00 and few items of apparel. The Court-fee payable is Rs. 1,546. 00. The respondents opposed this application saying that he had means to pay the Court-fee and the he had not disclosed in the petition all his assets. In fact in the cross-examination of the petitioner, examined as P. W. 1, it was brought out that he owns some site, and a cattle shed, that house tax was being paid in his name for that property, that there was a granary, and that he got life interest in the site, cattle s






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top