Skip to content


Liladhar Hansraj Vs. Shah Vallamji Khetshi of Jamnagar - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtGujarat High Court
Decided On
Case NumberCivil Misc. Petn. No. 2249 of 1960
Judge
Reported inAIR1962Guj63; (1961)0GLR648
ActsSupreme Court Rules, 1950 - Order 13, Rule 7 - Order 14, Rule 2
AppellantLiladhar Hansraj
RespondentShah Vallamji Khetshi of Jamnagar
Appellant Advocate B.R. Sompura, Asst. Govt. Pleader
Respondent AdvocateD.U. Shah, Adv.
Excerpt:
- .....a pauper he must statethat he is unable to pay the necessary court-fees and that he is unable to provide security or sureties for the costs of the respondent. order xiii, rule 7 of the supreme court rules provides that unless the court specially directs otherwise any security for costs to be furnished by the petitioner shall be in the sum of rs. 2500/- in cash or government securities. if the appellant is unable to satisfy both the requirements, viz., the payment of court-fees and also provision for security or sureties for the costs of the respondent, then he will have to be treated as a pauper. the finding of the second joint civil judge, jr. dn., jamnagar, is that the appellant is able to pay court-fees but unable to provide security or sureties for the costs of the respondent. on.....
Judgment:

Raju, J.

1. This matter has been sent to us by the Supreme Court for a finding whether for purposes of appeal to the Supreme Court the petitioner is a pauer or not. Rule 2 of Order XIV of the Rules of the Supreme Court provides that when an applicant applies for leave to proceed as a pauper he must statethat he is unable to pay the necessary court-fees and that he is unable to provide security Or sureties for the costs of the respondent. Order XIII, Rule 7 of the Supreme Court Rules provides that unless the Court specially directs otherwise any security for costs to be furnished by the petitioner shall be in the sum of Rs. 2500/- in cash or Government securities. If the appellant is unable to satisfy both the requirements, viz., the payment of court-fees and also provision for security or sureties for the costs of the respondent, then he will have to be treated as a pauper. The finding of the Second Joint Civil Judge, Jr. Dn., Jamnagar, is that the appellant is able to pay court-fees but unable to provide security Or sureties for the costs of the respondent. On the second point, the appellant's evidence has not been challenged by counter evidence of the respondent. We, therefore, see no reason not to accept the finding of the learned Second Joint Civil Judge Jr. Dn., Jamnagar, that the appellant is unable to provide for security or sureties for the costs of the respondent.

2. In these circumstances, our finding is that the appellant is a pauper for purposes of Order XIV, Rule 2 of the Rules of the Supreme Court as ho is unable to provide security or sureties for the costs of the respondent although he is able to pay the court-fee.

3. This finding of ours will be transmitted to the Supreme Court for their orders.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //