Back
2025 Supreme(AP) 942
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Ravi Nath Tilhari, Challa Gunaranjan, JJ.
Modegunta Ramachandraiah - Appellant
Versus
Nalabolu Mrudhula and another – Respondents
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 459 of 2023
Decided On : 07-05-2025
For the Appellant : Sri Nuthalapati Krishna Murthy, Sri S.S.Rama Krishna Prasad
Procedural defects in applications to sue as indigent persons are curable, and rejection based on such defects undermines access to justice.
Headnote:(A) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 33 Rules 1, 2, 3, and 5 - Application to sue as an indigent person - Rejection of application upheld on improper grounds - The trial court's dismissal focused on non-disclosure of other assets rather than the substantive question of indigence - The appellate court reinstated the matter for fresh review, emphasizing the overarching goal of allowing justice to be served to those unable to pay court fees (Paras 1, 6, 13).
(B) Procedure - The rules governing applications to sue as indigent persons are directory, not mandatory; procedural deficiencies should not automatically deny access to justice (Paras 11, 12, 20).
Facts of the case:
The appellant sought to declare himself as indigent to file a suit over disputed land, claiming ownership via inheritance from his deceased father. The trial court rejected his application due to alleged information omissions regarding other properties (Paras 1-4).
Findings of Court:
The appellate court found the trial court had erred by focusing on insignificant procedural aspects rather than examining the appellant's actual means, facilitating access to justice for the indigent (Para 14).
Issues: Whether the trial court justifiably rejected the application due to procedural omissions instead of assessing the substantive claim of indigence (Para 6).
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that procedural defects in applications from indigent persons are not fatal to their claims; the real issue is whether the applicant can afford court fees (Paras 10-12).
Result: Appeal allowed, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background and context of the application to sue as an indigent person. (Para 1 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments regarding the relevance of property disclosure for indigent status. (Para 6 , 10 , 12) |
| 3. interpretation of procedural requirements for indigent applications under order 33. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 11) |
| 4. decision to remand the case for further consideration. (Para 14 , 26) |
| 5. assessment of grounds for rejection of indigent applications. (Para 15 , 20 , 21) |
JUDGMENT :
Challa Gunaranjan, J.
Present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal arises out of order of dismissal, dated 04.05.2023, in I.A.No.406 of 2021 in un-numbered O.S. of 2023, on the file of the Principal District Judge, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District, rejecting the prayer of appellant/plaintiff to institute the Suit by declaring him as an indigent person (pauper) under Order 33 Rule 1 CPC.
2. Parties herein are referred to as they are arrayed in the Suit before the trial Court.
3. Facts leading to filing of present appeal are as follows:
Plaintiff filed present Suit for declaration of title and for consequential relief of permanent injunction against defendants. The suit schedule property consists of Ac.31.35 cents in Survey Nos.1881, 1882 and 1883 covered by Patta No.594, situated at Kothuru village, Nellore Bit-1. Plaintiff’s father M.Polaiah stated to have purchased the aforesaid land under agreement of sale, dated 15.04.1966 and he was issued passbook and has been in continuous possession and enjoyment. M.Polaiah executed Will, dated 26.08.1986, bequeathing aforesaid property in favour of plaintiff and after his death on 13.07.2001 by virtue of Will, plaintiff became absolute owner and possessor. He used to pay cist and his name has also been entered in Adangal. One Venkata Subba Reddy, who is no more, based on fabricated documents created un-registered sale deed alleged to have been executed by Dabbara Subbanna Chowdary claiming to be the owner of the very same property and got the same regularized under Section 5(A) of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbook Act, 1989 (for short, “the Act”) and basing on the same, he was also issued passbook. The entries made in revenue records in pursuance to aforesaid regularisation, came to be contested by plaintiff before M.R.O., R.D.O. and finally Joint Collector, vide proceedings No.(E3)/582/2013, dated 21.05.2016, relegating the parties to approach competent civil Court as there were serious title issues, however, the passbook and title deed issued in favour of late Venkata Subba Reddy were kept under abeyance. Meanwhile, Venkata Subba Reddy also filed O.S. No.309 of 2002 on the file of the 3rd Additional Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Nellore, which came to be dismissed for default on 13.04.2016, to which neither plaintiff nor his father were parties to. As the legal heirs of late Venkata Subba Reddy tried to interfere with peaceful possession and enjoyment of plaintiff, he has instituted the aforesaid Suit. As per the statement of valuation of suit schedule property, the same was declared as Rs.44,76,15,300/- and for the purpose of relief of declaration of title and consequential grant of permanent injunction in terms of A.P. Court Fee and Suits Valuation Act, the same was valued at Rs.23,51,84,700/- on which a court fee of Rs.23,59,500/- was arrived at to be payable in terms of Section 24(d) of the said Act. The plaintiff filed I.A.No.406 of 2021 under Order 33 Rule 1 CPC seeking leave of the Court to permit him to file the Suit by declaring him as an indigent person (pauper) due to his inability to pay court fee. Learned Principal District Judge, having set ex parte the defendants, proceeded to hear I.A. and by order, dated 04.05.2023, rejected the same by holding that plaintiff has not disclosed or averred about the existence of other properties owned by him besides also not disclosing his personal details as to whether plaintiff was employee or pensioner and further not disclosed whether he had disposed any property wit
