PADMANABHAN
PRABHAKARAN NAIR – Appellant
Versus
NEELAKANTAN PILLAI – Respondent
1. Leave to sue as an indigent person is sought to be revised by the respondent on three grounds: (1) The applicant (Respondent here) is not an indigent person (2) The allegations do not show a cause of action and (3) No notice was given to the Government Pleader and his report not obtained and considered.
2. Art.14 of the Constitution provides equality before law and equal protection of the laws. Directive principles of State Policy contained in Art.39A mandate the State to secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice, on a basis of equal opportunity and provides for free legal aid to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities. State is deriving revenue from court fee stamps and a litigant has to pay the prescribed fee when filing the suit. There are many persons who are unable to have access to the legal institutions, due to inability by reason of their poverty to pay the enormous fee which alone could give them an entry. This is why provisions have been enacted in 0.33 CPC exempting such persons from paying in the first instance, the fee prescribed and allowing them to pros
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.