V K GANDOTRA Vs. NEW BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHRI V. K. Gandotra filed as application for leave to sue as pauper, which application was resisted by the defendant -Bank. Learned Single Judge who tried the case framed issues regarding maintainability of the suit and also about pauperism of the plaintiff applicant and ultimately on May 3, 1979 decided the same against him In Letters Patent Appeal the Division Bench of this Court on March 1, 1991 partly allowed the appeal holding that the Court has jurisdiction to hear the case but decided that the plaintiff is not an indigent person and grant him two months time to pay the requisite court fee on the claim preferred by him Plaintiff in accordance with the said order has deposited the court fee. In this application defendant -Bank has taken a plea that the plaintiff has not presented the plaint in accordance with Order 33 Rule I.C.P.C and his earlier application filed cannot be treated so and has prayed for termination of the proceedings.

(2.) PLAINTIFF has filed objections stating therein that upon payment of Court fee as per direction of the Court and as per provisions of Order 33 Rule 15 -A. C. P. C. the application earlier filed by him under Order 33 for permission to sue in forma paupris should be deemed to be a plaint and there was thus no requirement of law to file a fresh plaint.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Order 33 C. P. C. deals with suits filed by indigent persons. Rule 1 relates to a suit to be instituted by such person. Then rules 2 & 3 provide mode for presentation of such application. Rule 10 deals with a matter when the plaintiff succeeds in the suit and permitted to sue as an indigent person. Rule 11 provides the procedure where the indigent person fails in his suit. Both these rules 10 & 11 treat the indigent person as plaintiff. According to Rule 11 when the -plaintiff fails and is not treated as indigent person the court is required to order him to pay the court fee which would have been paid by him if he had not been permitted to sue as an indigent person The Division Bench of this Court in Letters Patent Appeal has passed the following operative order: -