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

1997 Supreme(Ker) 370

Judges : K.NARAYANA KURUP
Sivarajan - Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala - Respondent
Case No : C.R.P. No. 2281 of 1997
Decided On : 12/04/1997
Advocates Appeared :
P. Kesavan Nair & K.G. Cletus For Petitioner

The trial court must conduct an independent enquiry on the question of indigency when an application is filed under 0.33 R.1 CPC.

Headnote:

0.33 R.1 CPC - Indigent Person - The court set aside an endorsement and directed the trial court to conduct an independent enquiry regarding the indigency of the petitioner and proceed with the suit in accordance with law.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner claimed to be the winner of the First Prize in the 1993 November draw of 'Periyar Lotteries' and filed a suit for declaration of ownership of the prize-winning lottery. He also filed an application under 0.33 R.1 CPC to be adjudged as an indigent person, which was returned by the court.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the mere pendency of the suit is not a ground to return the application filed under 0.33 R.1 CPC and set aside the endorsement, directing the trial court to conduct an independent enquiry regarding the petitioner's indigency and proceed with the suit in accordance with law.

Issues: Dispute regarding ownership of the lottery ticket, application under 0.33 R.1 CPC for adjudging as an indigent person, and the legality of the endorsement returning the application.

Ratio Decidendi: The mere pendency of the suit is not a ground to return the application filed under 0.33 R.1 CPC. The trial court has to conduct an independent enquiry on the question of indigency.

Final Decision: The court set aside the endorsement and directed the trial court to conduct an enquiry regarding the petitioner's indigency and proceed with the suit in accordance with law.

Judgment :-

K. Narayana Kurup, J. Heard counsel on both sides.

2. Having regard to the nature of the direction I propose to issue while disposing of the CRP, I am of the opinion that notice to respondents 3 and 4 is not necessary.

3. Petitioner claims to be the winner of First Prize in the 1993 November draw of "Periyar Lotteries". There is a dispute regarding the ownership of the lottery ticket. He has filed a suit for declaration that he is the owner of the prize winning lottery. In that suit, the petitioner paid 1/10 of the court fee. Pending the suit, he has filed an application under 0.33 R.1 CPC for adjudging that he is a indigent person. That application stand returned with the endorsement "Original Suit 12/97 is pending. So, there is no provision to receive this petition. Hence returned."

4. The endorsement has no legal authority. The mere pendency of the suit is not a ground to return the application filed under 0.33 R.1 CPC to sue as an indigent person. Once such an application is filed before the trial Court, the trial court has to conduct an independent enquiry on the question of indigency. Accordingly, the endorsement under challenge is hereby set aside and there will be a direction to the trial court to conduct an enquiry regarding the indigency of the petitioner and then proceed with the suit in accordance with law.

The C.R.P. is disposed of as above.

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top