LAWS(MAD)-2009-2-15

A R DURAI Vs. M RAJESWARI

Decided On February 19, 2009
A.R. DURAI Appellant
V/S
M.RAJESWARI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision petition is preferred against the order dated 23.04.2008 passed by the learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court No.1), Salem in Pauper petition No.149/2007 in Unnumbered O.S.No..... of 2008. Heard the learned counsel on both sides.

(2.) A resume of facts, which are absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this revision would run thus: The respondent herein sought permission before the lower Court to file the suit informa pauperis and consequently, it was numbered as POP 149 of 2007 and during enquiry she examined herself as P.W.1 and Exs.A1 to A3 were marked. Ultimately, the lower Court allowed the respondent/plaintiff herein to file the suit informa pauperis. Being disconcerted by and dissatisfied with the orders of the lower Court, this revision has been focussed on various grounds inter alia thus: The lower court has not appreciated the evidence properly the respondent/plaintiff admitted candidly that per month she is spending a sum of Rs.10,000/-, she has not disclosed anything about her source of income She has also admitted about her owning of the property at Nadukombai village, in addition to having admitted that she had sold a property for a sum of Rs.10 lakhs. No particulars were furnished relating to those facts. She also stated that she is owning a two wheeler. Her sons are well off. The lower court without properly analysing the evidence, blindly and wrongly permitted the respondent/plaintiff to file the suit informa pauperis.

(3.) HENCE, I am of the considered opinion that the lower court should have probed into those factual aspects in detail. Accordingly, the order dated 23.04.2008 passed by the lower court in P.O.P.No.149 of 2007 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the lower court, for being considered concerning the pauperism of the respondent/plaintiff herein purely on merits after giving due opportunity of adducing additional evidence to both sides. A reasoned order shall be passed by the lower court within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.