JANAK RAJ Vs. MANJU BALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A short but interesting question of law has been raised in the present revision petition on interpretation of Order XXXIII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (hereinafter referred to as "the Code"). The petitioner is the original defendant in Civil Suit No. 1 of 2000, pending in the Court of District Judge, Una. Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 are the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs filed a suit for maintenance against the defendant under Sections 18 and 20 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956. According to the plaintiffs, they were indigent persons and they had no sufficient means to pay necessary court fees on the plaint. They, therefore, made an application under Rules 1 and 2 of Order XXXIII of the Code and prayed to allow them to sue as indigent persons.

(2.) The learned District Judge, Una, passed an order on January 22, 2000, (sic) which reads as under: "The report of the collector has been received. As per the report of the Collector there is no property of the petitioner. The statement of the applicant also perused. In view of the statement of the plaintiff/applicant and report of the Collector, the application for permission to sue as an indigent person is allowed and the petitioner/plaintiff is allowed to sue as indulged person. The application stands disposed of. The suit be registered. Let the defendant be served for 15.3.2000. -

(3.) The said order is challenged by the petitioner defendant in the present revision.