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

1961 Supreme(Guj) 50

Gujarat High Court
Judgename :R.B.MEHTA, V.B.RAJU
LILADHAR HANSRAJ - Appellant
Versus
SHAH VALLAMJI KHETSHI - Respondent
Civil Miscellaneous Petition 2249 of 1960
Decided On : 04/17/1961

Advocates Appeared: B.R.SOMPURA, D.U.SHAH

Headnote:

Constitution of India 1950 – Civil Procedure Code - Order XIV Rule-2 - Order XIII Rule-7 - Unable to pay court-fees - Security or sureties for the costs - Matter has been sent to us by Supreme Court for a finding whether for purposes of appeal to Supreme Court the petitioner is a pauper or not - Rules of Supreme Court provides that when an applicant applies for leave to proceed as a pauper he must state that he is unable to pay necessary court-fees and that he is unable to provide security or sureties for costs of respondent - Supreme Court Rules provides that unless Court specially directs otherwise any security for costs to be furnished by petitioner shall be in sum of cash or Government securities – Held, In these Circumstances our finding is that appellant is a pauper for purposes of Rules of Supreme Court as he is unable to provide security or sureties - Order accordingly

V. B. RAJU, J.

( 1 ) THIS matter has been sent to us by the Supreme Court for a finding whether for purposes of appeal to the Supreme Court the petitioner is a pauper or not. Rule 2 of Order XIV of the Rules of the Supreme Court provides that when an applicant applies for leave to proceed as a pauper he must state that he is unable to pay the necessary court-fees and that he is unable to provide security or sureties for the costs of the respondent. Order XIII Rule-7 of the Supreme Court Rules provides that unless the Court specially directs otherwise any security for costs to be furnished by the petitioner shall be in the sum of Rs. 2500/in cash or Government securities. If the appellant is unable to satisfy both the requirements viz. the payment of court-fees and also provision for security or sureties for the costs of the respondent them he will have to be treated as a pauper. The finding of the Second Joint Civil Judge Jr. Dn. Jamnagar is that the appellant is able to pay court-fees but unable to provide security or sureties for the costs of the respondent. On the second point the appellants evidence has not been challenged by counter evidence of the respondent. We therefore see no reason not to accept the finding of the learned Second Joint Civil Judge Jr. Dn. Jamnagar that the appellant is unable to provide for security or sureties for the Costs of the respondent.

( 2 ) IN these Circumstances our finding is that the appellant is a pauper for purposes of Order XIV Rule-2 of the Rules of the Supreme Court as he is unable to provide security or sureties for the costs of the respondent although he is able to pay the court-fees.

( 3 ) THIS finding of ours will be transmitted to the Supreme Court for their orders. Order accordingly.


.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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 Back to top