CF0000051799 IN THE mOH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR C.G. M.C.C. 53 ^i^2-€>u FA.no. /2010 Gandhi,aged 61 yrs., s/o late Shri Jaichand Gandhi, c/o Manohar Madewar, at hotel Manohar, Shanichari Bazar, Bilaspur, C.G. Applicant (Plaintiff) Versus. ^Mahalaxmi Paddy Processing Company, a jiartnership firm , through its partner Shri Rajendra Kumar Agarwal, at Mahalaxmi Rice Mill premises, Moa,Raipur, C.G. 2. Smt. Janki Devi, aged 60 yrs. wd/o late Shri Bhagwandas, at Mahalaxmi Rice Mill prernises, Moa, Raipur, C.G. 3. Smt.Shakuntla Devi, aged 55 yrs, w/o Shri Om Prakash Agarwal, r/o Karishma Apartments, V.I.P. Road, Telibandha, Raipur, C.G. l.i' 4. Shri Govind Prasad, aged about 55 yrs., s/o late Shri Nathulal Agarwal,r/o Karishma Apartments, V.I.P.road, Telibandha, Raipur,C.G. 5. Shri Rajendra Kumar, aged 51 yrs.,s/o late Shri Nathulal Agarwal, r/o Mahalaxmi Rice Mill premises, Moa, Raipur, C.G. Respondents ( Defendants) Application under Order 44 Rule 1 Code ofCivil Procedure for leave to prefer appeal as an mdigent person. Suit valued at Rs.10,72,800/- Court fees payable Rs. 88,360/- C.F.not paid: Suit filed in forma pauperis as pennitted by the todal court.. :vts'" First Appeal valued at Rs. 3,60;000/-C.F.payable approx.Rs. 29,700.00. C.F. notpaid. Appeal in fonna pauperis.Memo of Appeal u/Sec. 96 C.P.C. is filed along with the application. ^s. /s^^ l^ HK3H COURT OF CHHAmSGARH. BILASPUR CCWAM: Hon'bte Shri l.M. Quddusi, J. & Hon'bleShri Prashant Kumar Mishra. J. APPLICANT M.C.C.^to.59 of 2011 Subhashchand Gandhi. Versus RESR3NDENTS and othere. snn Bhishma Klnger, counset for the appllcant. Shri Pawan Keshaiwani, counsel for the rsspondents. Followng oral order I. M. Quddusi. J. CWU.ORDER (2SWXU2011) of the Court was psesed by I.A. No. 2 applteaUon for ogindonatton ofdelay. AccordiiKl to the Registry ofthis Gourt, there js 18 daKsjEletay in filing the M.C.C. Consldering ttie explanation given in the awlicaBon for cQtidonation of delay, we are of the opinionthatthe delay has bem exptained satisfactorily, therefore thedelayinfilTOttieM.C.C. is condoned. This M.C.C. under Order 44 Rute 1 of C.P.C. has been preferred seeldng leave to prefer First Appeal against the judgment and decree passed by UCAdditional Di^rtet Judge, Raipur in Civil Suit No. 1A/08, as an indigent person. Learned counsel for the applreant would submit that e plaintifT/applicarit was exempted from payment of Court fees in the suit, as he was granted teave to sue as indigent pereon under Orcter 33 <rf C.P.C. He would also submit that the financial position of the applicant has nd improved after the date of pasSlhg of Impugned judgment and decree and therefore he deserves to be pennitted to file the appeal as an ind^ent person. We have perused ttie record of the tria) Court. The applfcant was permitted to sue as an in<figent person. The nwi-applicants have been served. however the, statement made by the aM)lica"t that his finandat positton has n<rt improved, has not been controverted. ;SiSS8E» -^ "'^ '.te.a<iik "^ ^ 8 •'^^^ Sk"^ ,£»te<s^ --^ss^ @ -2. M? In view of the above, this Court deems it proper to allow the application under Order 44 Rule 1 of C.P.C. and grant leave to the applicant to prefer the appeal as an indigent person and for that he is exempted from payment of Court fees. This order shall be subject to the provisions of law as contained under Order 44 of C.P.C. and in the event the plaintiff/appellant succeeds in this appeal, the amount of court fee shall be recoverable in accordance with taw. As a consequence of grant of leave to sue as an indigent person, this M.C.C. stands allowed. Registry is directed to register regular First Appeal and list the same along with F.A. No. 118 of 2010 on 11"' May, 201 1 for hearing- Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge