R. Narayana Pisharadi, J.

This appeal is filed by the plaintiff in the suit O.S. No. 6 of 2014 on the file of the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Kottayam. The respondents in the appeal are the defendants in the suit.

2. The suit was instituted for granting a decree for realization of an amount of Rs.10,83,98,600/- from the defendants with interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the principal amount of Rs.7,97,81,997/- from the date of the suit till the date of realisation. The total amount of court fee payable by the appellant on the plaint was Rs.18,02,386/-. The appellant/plaintiff paid one-tenth of this amount at the time of institution of the suit as per Section 4A of the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1959. He was bound to pay the balance court fee of Rs.16,22,146/- within fifteen days from the date of framing of the issues in the suit.

3. The defendants entered appearance in the suit and filed a written statement. The issues in the suit were framed on 28.10.2015. On that date, the court below directed the plaintiff to pay the balance amount of court fee within fifteen days and posted the suit to 20.11.2015. On 20.11.2015, the plaintiff filed the application I.A.No.1701 of 2015 in the lower court for granting him permission to continue the suit as an indigent person.

4. The material averments in the affidavit filed by the plaintiff in support of the application I.A.No.1701 of 2015 are the following: It is not possible for him to pay the balance amount of court fee due to his financial stringency. He owns 3.36 acres of land and a residential building having an area of 10,000 square feet and also 1.81 acres of nilam, having a total value of Rs.3,87,05,000/-. These properties do not yield any income. It is not possible to sell or encumber these properties to raise money. Most of these properties are attached in Arbitration Case No. 329 of 2015 instituted against him by Tata Capital Financial Services Limited for realisation of an amount of Rs.4,62,55418/- from him. The remaining properties are also attached in a suit for realisation of money instituted against him by Capital Investments in the Sub Court, Muvattupuzha. The plaintiff has got no liquid cash with him. The amount in his name in the bank is not more than Rs.5,000/-. The plaintiff meets his daily necessities with the help of his friends and relatives. At the time of institution of the suit, he was conducting a foreign exchange business having goodwill. But, due to some unwanted interference by the Reserve Bank of India at the instance of some rival businessmen, huge loss occurred in his business and it was closed. The plaintiff is not conducting any business at present. He has no source of income to pay the balance amount of court fee. The agricultural income from all his properties is less than Rs.20,000/- per year.

5. The defendants filed objections to the aforesaid application contending that the petition is not maintainable at a stage after the institution of the suit and that the attempt of the plaintiff is only to protract the proceedings in the suit O.S.No.452 of 2012 filed against him by the defendants. They also contended that the plaintiff has to prove that his properties are under attachment. They contended that the plaintiff paid an amount of Rs.1,14,00,000/- in favour of Tata Capital Financial Services Limited in connection with Arbitration Case No.329 of 2015. They further contended that the plaintiff gets a monthly income of more than Rs.2,00,000/- by letting out his residential building for shooting films and serials and that he has got sufficient means to pay the court fee.

6. During the enquiry in the application conducted by the lower court, the plaintiff was examined as PW1 but no documents were marked on his side. On the side of the defendants, DW1 was examined and Exts.B1 to B3 documents were marked. After appreciating the evidence adduced by the parties and the rival contentions raised by them, the lower court fou