CHINNASWAMI GOUNDAN Vs. ANTHONYSWAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANT 1 is the revision Petitioner. The revision petition is from an order allowing a suit to be filed in 'forma pauperis'. The Plaintiff belongs to the Vannia Tamil Christian community in Chittoor. It is alleged in the plaint that the rules of the Hindu Mitakshara Law apply to the community so far as inheritance and succession are concerned. The suit is for setting aside a decree and court sale relating to the family properties of the Plaintiff and for partition of the same. The value of the suit is Rs. 1,89,700 and the court -fee to be paid is Rs. 1900/ -.

(2.) THE three grounds urged by Defendant 1 in the Court below were urged here also With regard to the 1st ground the contention of Defendant 1 is that the Plaintiff has admitted when he was examined in the Court below that he is entitled to get a sum of Rs. 500 from his uncle as unpaid purchase money for a sale deed executed by him in favour of the latter. The Plaintiff has not included this in the schedule of assets appended to the petition. It is contended that this amounts to an intentional and fraudulent suppression of the assets of the Plaintiff and, therefore, a violation of the provisions of Order 33, Rule 2, Code of Civil Procedure.

(3.) IT was argued for the Plaintiff -Respondent that it is only in cases in which the non -disclosure of an asset by the Plaintiff amounts to an act of bad faith that the petition can be rejected under Order 33, Rule 8(a).