PARVEEN KUMAR ANAND Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE suit for recovery of Rs. 1,18,000/- with interest was decreed against the petitioner by the trial Court. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the first Appellate Court. The petitioner also made an application to file the appeal as an indigent person. It was claimed in the said application that he does not own or possess any property or amount to pay the requisite court fee. The said application was dismissed by the first appellate Court on the ground that a sum of Rs. 4790. 68 p is lying deposited to the credit of the petitioner in his provident fund account and he can raise, loan from this amount, for payment of court-fee. This order is being impugned by the petitioner in the present revision petition.

(2.) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the impugned order cannot be sustained. Order 33, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, provides as under ; (Explanation 1.--A person is an indigent person-

(3.) A reading of these provisions clearly indicates that deposit under the Provident Fund is exempted from attachment in a decree passed by any Court, and therefore, the amount lying deposit to the credit to the petitioner in his provident fund account cannot be taken into consideration for holding that he is not an indigent person. Thus, to my mind, the petitioner is an indigent person and is entitled to prefer an appeal as such.