N APPANNA Vs. N MANGATAYARAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiffs were permitted to file the suit O.S. No. 31/1978 informa pauperis in the court of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Anantapur. Subsequently, on 13th December, 1979, they sold a portion of the suit property for Rs. 3,300/- to one Sake Peddanna under a registered sale deed. Thereupon, the defendants filed a petition to dispaupense the plaintiffs on the grouad that they had the means to pay the court fees on the plaints, The plaintiffs resisted that potition by stating that they had incurred debts, for their livelihood and in order to discharge those debts, they had sold a portion of the suit property to Peddanna. They further stated that the amount realised by the sale of the suit property was not sufficient to pay the Court fees.

(2.) The learned Additional Subordinate Judge dismissed the petition holding that the amount realised by the plaintiffs by sale was not sufficient to pay the court fees and the same was spent by them in order to discharge the debts incurred to maintain themselves. Questioning that order the defendants have filed this revision,

(3.) It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in view of the sale in the course of the suit the plaintiffs are guilty of improper conduct within the meaning of Order 33 Rule 9 (a) C.P.C,, and therefore, the lower court should have dispauperised the plaintiffs. In this connection he relied upon Rustamji Cawasji vs. General Cotton Mills.