* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 17.03.2025 Judgment delivered on: 15.05.2025 + CMI 6/2019 & CM APPL. 26975/2019 N.V. RAMAMI .....Petitioner VERSUS THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA .....Respondent Memo of Appearance For the Appellant: Ms. Sunita Singh and Mr. Abhigya Kushwah, Advocates with petitioner in person For the Respondents: Mr. Amir Singh Pasrich and Mr.Karan Bahmani, Advocates CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN

JUDGMENT

MANOJ JAIN, J

1. It needs to be evaluated whether appellant can be permitted to file the appeal in question as an indigent person or not.

2. Before coming to the aspect of indigency, let me, in brief, take note of the relevant background facts.

3. Appellant-Mr. N.V. Ramami was employed by Canadian High Commission as Librarian/Typist way back in the year 1975 and was stationed in New Delhi. He, eventually, got promoted as Accounts CMI 6/2019 1 of 17 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Officer in the year 1982 and his job profile, inter alia, included handling of cash, bank drafts and cheques of various currencies etc.

4. During such employment, plaintiff-Commission learnt that funds were missing from their accounts and either there was no record in the bank account or there was mismatch. It, accordingly, decided to inquire into the matter, while also expecting a reasonable explanation from appellant.

5. Appellant, instead, sent resignation on 05.12.1994 and, since he did not give any reason for the same, the respondent suspected his complicity in said misappropriation of funds. When he was called for hearing and was asked to explain the above, he, even, offered to pay back a sum of Rs. 1 lac, of his own volition.

6. Fact, however, remains that he, eventually, retracted from his such commitment also.

7. Inquiry conducted by the plaintiff-Commission castigated him and, besides initiating separate criminal proceedings, suit in question was filed seeking recovery of alleged misappropriated amount under different heads i.e. Immigration Cost Recovery Misappropriation, Duplicate/Fraudulent Cheque Misappropriation, Conversion/theft and/or misappropriation of cash.

CMI 6/2019 2 of 17 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed

8. After comprehensive trial, vide judgment dated 08.01.2019, the suit was decreed for principal amount of Rs. 37,84,470/- with interest @

6% per annum.

9. Appellant has challenged the aforesaid decree by filing a Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of CPC.

10. Along with appeal, he also filed an application under Order XLIV Rule 1 CPC seeking permission to file the present appeal as an indigent person. It has been averred in the application that he has no source of income and he is not possessed with sufficient means to enable him to pay court fee and he is rather dependent on meager pension of his wife, for his survival. He also claimed that he had no son to support him in his old age and, therefore, permission has been sought to file the appeal as an indigent person.

11. Along with application, he gave details of movable & immovable properties which he possessed. These are as under: -

CMI 6/2019 3 of 17 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed

12. This Court, vide order dated 30.05.2019, directed Registrar (Appellate) to dispose of aforesaid application seeking permission to file appeal as an indigent person.

13. During enquiry, Registrar (Appellate) issued notice to concerned SDM to file report regarding financial status of appellant. The report of SDM was received which reads as under: -

"1. That the Halqa Patwari/F. KGO of Sub Division (Punjabi Bagh) was directed to submit the stat