MATHEW Vs. KERALA UNITED CORPORATION LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The point for decision in this Revision Petition is whether a company as a juridical person is entitled to sue in forma pauperis under O.33, R.1, C.P.C.

(2.) The contention raised before us is that the terms of O.33, R.1, C.P.C. confer the privilege of suing as a pauper only upon a person and that the word must for the purpose of O.33 mean only natural person as distinguished from juridical persons such as Corporations, Companies, Associations or idols. In support of this proposition reliance has been placed firstly upon the case reported in S.M. Mitra v. Corporation of Royal Exchange Assurance (AIR 1930 Rang. 259). In that case the applicant was an official receiver who applied to sue in forma pauperis. It was held.

(3.) A contrary view had been taken by a Division Bench of the same High Court in an earlier case in D.K. Cassim & Sons v. Abdul Rahman (AIR 1930 Rang. 272) where it was held that a firm can be considered as a person within the meaning of O.33. R.1, C P. C , having regard to the definition of that term in the General Clauses Act (X of 1897). Probably this decision was not brought to the notice of their Lordships when they decided the case in AIR 1930 Rang 259.