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

1974 Supreme(Bom) 32

M.N.CHANDURKAR, P.S.SHAH
SANTOKSINGH – Appellant
Versus
RADHESHYAM – Respondent


JUDGMENT

CHANDURKARJ.-This revision application has been referred to the Division Bench in view of the divergence of judicial view On the question as to whether the legal representatives of a plaintiff who was granted permission to sue in forma pauperis can continue the suit without payment of court-fee in case he is possessed of sufficient means to pay the required court-fee.

2. One Beant Kuwal widow of Balwantsingh had filed an application for permission to sue the defendants in forma pauperis and the relief claimed against the defendants was the declaration of the plaintiff's title to the suit property which consisted of a house and a decree for possession and mesne profits against original defendants Nos. 1 to 3. This application was allowed on 2-11-1965 and the application was registered as a regular civil suit on that date. A revision application challenging the order of the trial Court granting permission to the original applicant to file a suit in forma pauperies came to be rejected. However, on 29-8-1967 Beant Kuwar died and the present applicants Nos. I to 3 applied to the trial Court on 25-11-1967 for being brought on record as legal representatives. This application was




































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