BHIM SAIN Vs. MANOJ KUMAR AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a defendant. He is primarily aggrieved against the order dated February 16, 2004, vide which the learned first appellate court had declined to treat the defendant as an indigent person. Subsequently since the defendant failed to make the payment of court fee, the appeal filed by him was also dismissed for want of requisite court fee vide order dated March 6, 2004. The petitioner has challenged both the aforesaid orders by way of present revision petition.

(2.) AT the outset learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner presses the present revision petition only for grant of time to pay the requisite court fee in the appeal before the learned first appellate court. He accordingly prays that the requisite court fee shall be paid by the petitioner within a period of one month from today.

(3.) AFTER hearing the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts of the present case, I feel that one last opportunity should be granted to the defendant petitioner to make good the payment of court fee in this case. However, the fact cannot be lost sight of that the appeal is being filed by the defendant only against a money decree. In these circumstances I leave it open to the learned first appellate court to decide as to whether the aforesaid money decree is liable to be stayed or not.