MT RAMNANDI KUER Vs. RUP NARAIN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is directed against an order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Second Court, Gaya, rejecting the petitioner s, application under Order 33, Rule 1, Civil P.C., to sue in forma pauperis.

(2.) The cause of action was based on a simple mortgage bond for Rs. 2800, in regard to which there was a claim also for interest amounting to Rs. 2600, and the court-fee payable was Rs. 427-8-0. The petitioner gave a list of her property, the value of which came only to Rs. 74-10-0. An inquiry was made by the Collector, who reported that the petitioner was a pauper. The learned Subordinate Judge however took the view that the petitioner was not a pauper, because she was obviously in possession of the valuable mortgage bond on which she sought to base her claim. In other words, he took into consideration the claim itself as part of the assets of the petitioner, and apparently upon the view that that claim was worth sufficient, if sold to a champertor, to pay the court-fees, he rejected the application.

(3.) The meaning of the word "pauper" is explained as follows in Order 33, Rule 1: "A person is a pauper when he is not possessed of sufficient means to enable him to pay the fee prescribed by law for the plaint in such suit, or, where no such fee is prescribed, when he is not entitled to property worth one hundred rupees other than his necessary wearing-apparel and the subject-matter of the suit."