JANAKYKUTTY Vs. VARGHESE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two petitions for permission to sue in forma pauperis were dismissed and have given rise to the above two revision petitions. The question is common in both the cases and the petitioner is the same in both. And so, I am disposing them of by a single judgment.

(2.) Who is a pauper, within the meaning of O.33 R.1 C. P. C. I have often felt that this pejorative expression "pauper" ill fits a statute in a republic where the overwhelming majority are absolutely poor and the scales of court fee are abnormally high. English has not been so pauperised as to be unable to find a more becoming word to describe one who has no ability to pay court fee for a suit.

(3.) The petitioner is a minor and has brought two suits through a next friend, her uncle, to set aside two alienations by her mother, the 3rd defendant, in favour of the 1st defendant in each case. The property is claimed by the minor plaintiff as heir to her father, Sankaran Nair, but I am not concerned with merits of the claim as the question raised in these revision petitions is merely as to whether the petitioner is entitled, to take advantage of the provisions of O.23 R.1 C. P. C.