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

1950 Supreme(Mad) 52

P.V.RAJAMANNAR, SOMASUNDARAM


Advocates:
The Government Pleader (K. Kuttikrishna Menon) appeared in support of the case.
R. Sundaralingam for Plaintiff.

Judgment

The Chief Justice:We are of opinion that if a plaintiff who has filed a suit in forma pauperis abandons a part of his claim he should be called upon to pay the proportionate court-fee on the part abandoned. This follows from the language of Order 33, rule 11, Civil Procedure Code, as amended in Madras. If the suit is withdrawn in its entirety, then undoubtedly the pauper plaintiff has to pay court-fee on the entire claim. Abandonment of a part of the claim is tantamount to withdrawal of the suit in part. He will therefore be liable to pay court-fee on the part withdrawn or abandoned. We find that a similar view was taken by Shahabuddin, J., in C. R. P. No. 454 of 1946. The reference is answered accordingly.

K.S. ----- Reference answered.


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