Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
S. Manu, J
Raju K. Mathews – Appellant
Versus
Arvind Pundalik Tendulkar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background regarding the plaintiff's financial status and suit details. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. parties' contentions on the maintainability of an indigent application post-suit filing. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 30) |
| 3. judicial precedents affirm that an indigent application is maintainable after suit institution if the applicant lacks sufficient means to pay balance court fees. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
S.MANU, J.
Dated this the 17th day of June, 2026
JUDGMENT
1. Appellant is the plaintiff in O.S.No.59 of 2023 of the Sub Court, Ernakulam. The suit was filed to recover an amount of Rs.12,50,51,989/- with future interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the respondent and for other allied reliefs. The appellant paid Rs.1,96,900/- as one-tenth of the court fee and Rs.1,25,060/- as one-tenth of the legal benefit fund while filing the suit. The balance court fee payable is Rs.17,72,020/- and the balance payable towards legal benefit fund is Rs.11,25,460/-
2. According to the appellant, a practicing lawyer, he met with an accident after filing the suit. He was
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
