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

1987 Supreme(Ker) 250

PADMANABHAN
PRABHAKARAN NAIR – Appellant
Versus
NEELAKANTAN PILLAI – Respondent


Judgment :-

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









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