VINODAN Vs. MATHAPPAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The original petition is filed challenging Ext P3 order passed by the Court of the First Additional Subordinate Judge, Thrissur, in IA No.2554/2010 in OS No.870/2000.

(2.) The facts leading to Ext P3 order, in a nutshell, are; the petitioners are the plaintiffs in OS No.870/2000, which was filed against the respondents, for damages. The petitioners filed the suit as an indigent person. The same was rejected by the court below. The petitioner challenged the said order before this Court in CMA No.165/2000. By Ext P1 judgment, this Court confirmed the order of the court below, but granted the petitioners three months' time from 23/8/2000, to remit the court-fee due on the plaint. The petitioners did not remit the court-fee. The courtbelow rejected the plaint. The petitioners filed IA No.2554/2010, to review the order. The court below, by the impugned Ext P3 order, dismissed the review petition. Ext P3 is erroneous and wrong. Hence the original petition.

(3.) Heard; Sri.Rajit, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners on admission.