ZAINAB BEGUM ALIAS VARALAKSHMI Vs. KHURSHEED BEGUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Satyanarayana Raju,J.-This is a petition under Article 133 of the Constitution for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against the decision of this Court in Civil Revision Petition No. 1705 of 1961 which affirmed an order passed by the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, refusing leave to the petitioner to file a suit in forma pauperis.

(2.) Under Article 133 an appeal lies to the Supreme Court only against judgments, decrees or final orders. The test of finality was laid down by the Privy Council in Abdul Rahiman v. Cassim and Sons, (1932) 64 M.L..J.307 : L.R. 60 I.A. 76 :A.I.R. 1933 P.C. 58, as follows :-

(3.) Now, there is a long line of authority that an order granting leave to sue in forma pauperis or an order refusing leave to appeal in forma pauperis is a mere matter of procedure not deciding finally the rights of the parties and, therefore, not a final order. Nearly six decades ago, a Full Bench of the Calcutta High Court held in Babu Sakan Singh v, Gopal Chandra Neogi, 8 C.W.N. 296, that an order made under section 622 of the Civil Procedure Code of 1882 (corresponding to section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code of 1908) granting leave to sue in forma pauperis