HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI, J
KALABAI RAWAT – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's claim of indigent status based on income. (Para 2) |
"(1) That, the impugned order dated 05.02.2024 (Annexure P/1) passed by the learned Trial Court may kindly be please to set-aside/quashed.
(2) That, the application filed by the petitioner under Order 33 Rule 1 of CPC may kindly be allowed and petitioner be exempt from filing the court fees in the suit.
(3) That, other suitable writ order or direction for doing justice in the matter may kindly be issued. Cost may kindly be granted."
2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned trial Court has erred in passing the impugned order. As per the report appended on the record, it reveals that the annual income of the petitioner is Rs.80,000/- and personal income is Rs.20,000/- per year. Therefore, learned trial court has erred in Signature Not Verified assuming that the petitioner/plaintiff is capable of paying the Court fees which is Rs.1,50,000/-. Therefore, impugned order is liable to be set aside. He relied upon a judgment in the case of Mohan Singh Vs. Ravindranath and others , 2011 (I)MPWN 19.
3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents No.5 to 9
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.