SOLOMON SELVARAJ & ORS. versus INDIRANI BHAGAWAN SINGH & ORS.

SOLOMON SELVARAJ & ORS. versus INDIRANI BHAGAWAN SINGH & ORS.

The Supreme Court held that an application under Order 33 Rule 1 CPC seeking permission to sue as an indigent person can be rejected under Order 33 Rule 5 CPC where the plaint prima facie does not disclose a cause of action or the suit is barred by res judicata; however, under Order 33 Rule 15A the court may, while rejecting or refusing such an application, grant time to pay the requisite court-fee and upon payment the suit shall be deemed instituted on the date the application was presented. Applying these provisions, the Court found no error in the trial court's rejection of the indigent application but granted four weeks to the appellants to pay the requisite court-fees, with specified...

Parties
Appellants (original Plaintiffs): Solomon Selvaraj & Ors.; Respondents (original Defendants): Indirani Bhagawan Singh & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
02 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court Against High Court Judgment Dated 28.01.2022 in CMA No.38 of 2021
Outcome
Appeal disposed of
Legal Topics
Order 33 CPC, Indigent Persons, Res Judicata, Cause of Action, Abuse of Process, Court Fee, Order 7 Rule 11 CPC
Civil Procedure Property Law Order 33 CPC Indigent Persons Res Judicata Cause of Action Abuse of Process Court Fee +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Solomon Selvaraj & Ors.

Appellants (original Plaintiffs)

Indirani Bhagawan Singh & Ors.

Respondents (original Defendants)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court Against High Court Judgment Dated 28.01.2022 in CMA No.38 of 2021

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an application under Order 33 Rule 1 CPC to sue as an indigent person can be rejected on the grounds that the plaint does not disclose a cause of action or that the suit is barred by res judicata (Order 33 Rule 5 CPC)
  2. 2 If such an application is rejected, what relief or orders the court can pass, in particular the scope of Order 33 Rules 15 and 15A regarding granting time to pay court-fee and deeming the suit instituted

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that an application under Order 33 Rule 1 CPC seeking permission to sue as an indigent person can be rejected under Order 33 Rule 5 CPC where the plaint prima facie does not disclose a cause of action or the suit is barred by res judicata; however, under Order 33 Rule 15A the court may, while rejecting or refusing such an application, grant time to pay the requisite court-fee and upon payment the suit shall be deemed instituted on the date the application was presented. Applying these provisions, the Court found no error in the trial court's rejection of the indigent application but granted four weeks to the appellants to pay the requisite court-fees, with specified...

Court Disposition

Appeal disposed of

Orders

  • Four weeks granted to the appellants (original applicants) to pay the requisite court-fees.
  • Upon payment of the requisite court-fees within the time granted the suit shall be deemed to have been instituted on the date on which the application for permission to sue as an indigent person was presented.