Skip to content


In Re: Alamelu - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai High Court
Decided On
Case NumberReferred Case No. 3 of 1949
Judge
Reported inAIR1950Mad561
ActsCode of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 33, Rule 11
AppellantIn Re: Alamelu
Advocates:Government Pleader and ; R. Sundaralingam, Adv.
Excerpt:
- rajamannar, c.j.1. we are of opinion that if a plaintiff who has filed a suit in forma, pauperis abandons a part of his claim he should be called upon to pay the proportionate court-fee on the part abandoned. this follows from the language of order 33, rule 11, civil p. c., as amended in madras. if the suit is withdrawn in its entirety, then undoubtedly, the pauper plaintiff has to pay court-fee on the entire claim. abandonment of a part of the claim is tantamount to withdrawal of the suit in part. he will therefore be liable to pay court-fee on the part withdrawn or abandoned. we find that a similar view was taken by shahabuddin j., in c. r. p. 454 of 1946. the reference is answered accordingly.
Judgment:

Rajamannar, C.J.

1. We are of opinion that if a plaintiff who has filed a suit in forma, pauperis abandons a part of his claim he should be called upon to pay the proportionate court-fee on the part abandoned. This follows from the language of Order 33, Rule 11, Civil P. C., as amended in Madras. If the suit is withdrawn in its entirety, then undoubtedly, the pauper plaintiff has to pay court-fee on the entire claim. Abandonment of a part of the claim is tantamount to withdrawal of the suit in part. He will therefore be liable to pay court-fee on the part withdrawn or abandoned. We find that a similar view was taken by Shahabuddin J., in C. R. P. 454 of 1946. The reference is answered accordingly.


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