SRI U. MAHABALA SHETTY Vs. SHRIRAM INVESTMENTS LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition impugning the orders dated 22.11.2013 in M.A. No.85/2011 on the file of the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dakshina Kannada, Mangaluru and the order dated 10.03.2010 in Misc. Case No.25/2003 on the file of III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mangalore D.K, and for other relief/s.

(2.) The petitioner instituted proceedings under Order 33, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'the CPC') claiming to be an indigent person for recovery of damages in a sum of Rs. 6,24,190/- against the respondent, and the petitioner's claim to institute the proceedings as indigent person, was rejected by the first Court on 10.03.2010. The First Court considered the admission by the petitioner that he had an account with the Syndicate Bank, Mission Street and that he had Permanent Account Number (for short 'the PAN') from the Income-Tax Department, but the petitioner neither produced the bank statement nor filed the returns. The petitioner challenged this order of the First Court in appeal in M.A.No.85/2011.

(3.) The Appellate Court after taking note of the petitioner's admission that the petitioner held Bank Statement and was a PAN card holder but had not furnished either the bank statements or the returns filed before the Income-Tax Department, considered the petitioner's evidence that the petitioner's son was abroad and the petitioner was living in one of the prime locations in the city of Mangaluru that was owned by his close relative. The Appellate Court also considered the evidence that the petitioner and his wife were shareholders in a private entity. The Appellate Court in consideration of this evidence concluded that the petitioner cannot be considered an indigent person and that the order of the first court did not call for interference.