S NAGARAJAN Vs. S P THIRUMALAISAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ANIMADVERTING upon the order dated 7.02.2011 passed in I.A.No.64 of 2009 in unnumbered Pauper Appeal No.......of 2009, by the on the file of the Principal District Judge, Namakkal, this civil revision petition is focussed.

(2.) HEARD both sides.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner placing reliance on the grounds of revision, would pilot his arguments to the effect that absolutely there is no iota or shred, shard or miniscule extent of evidence to show that the defendant is having sufficient amount to a tune of Rs.31,525/- to pay as Court fee and prosecute the appeal. Simply because there is admission on the part of the revision petitioner that he is having half share in the agricultural land of 2-1/2 acres, and that he is having half share in the dilapidated house, it does not mean that he is having sufficient means to pay such a huge Court fee. Unless there is evidence to show that he is having sufficient income to pay such a huge Court fee, the question of he filing the appeal informa pauperis would not raise, but the appellate Court simply taking into account the existence of the immovable properties over which the revision petitioner is having interest, dismissed the prayer, warranting interference in the revision.