B.S. VERMA, J. –

Heard learned Counsel for tl1e revisionist and perused the record.

2. Learned Counsel for the revisionist files supplementary affidavit. The same is taken on record. By means of this revision, the revisonist has prayed that the impugned order dated 18.5.2010 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division) Rishikesh, whereby the application paper No. 54-A was allowed the permission was granted by the Court to register the suit as pauper suit.

3. The revisionist is the defendant No. 2 in the suit filed by Mr. Ankit Khokhar against Upkhand Adhikari, Vidyut Vitran Upkhand and another. The Court has obtained the report of the Collector as to whether the plaintiff is an indigent person. The report was obtained from Tehsildar concerned and on the basis of the report, the Collector has recommended that the plaintiff i~ a disabled as well as an indigent person.

4. The revisionist filed her objection against the application moved by the plaintiff alleging that the father of the plaintiff is a driver in the Roadways and he is getting Rs. 10,000/- as salary.

5. The suit has been filed for compensation against the Electricity Department on the ground that the plaintiff had