MINNEKURU NAGALAKSHMAMMA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. In this review application the short point that arises for consideration is that when once an application filed to grant leave to prefer a second appeal in forma pauperis is allowed and leave was granted, later when the case is posted for admission whether it is open to the Court to dismiss it in limini on the ground that no question of law is involved and the determination of the case depends upon questions of fact which were found against the appellant by both the lower courts.

(2.) The application for leave to appeal in forma pauperis was ordered by my learned brother, Mr. Justice Sambasiva Rao. Subsequently when the second appeal was posted before me for admission, I dismised it without admitting it on the ground that the determination of the case turns only upon questions of fact which were concur rently found against the petitioner by both the lower Courts. Sub. sequently this review petition is filed on the ground that once leave was granted to file a second appeal in forma pauperis thereafter this Court has no jurisdiction to dismiss the appeal in limini on the ground that only questions of fact are involved.

(3.) The procedure to be followed by a Court on presenting an application by any person edititled to prefer an appeal, who is unable to pay the fee required for the memorandum of appeal, is laid down in Order 44 Rule 1 (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure. It is conve- nient to extract that rule here ;