IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 343 of 2011 Date of decision: October 17, 2011 Tarsem Singh Khatkar .. Petitioner Vs. State Bank of Patiala .. Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Mehar Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vikas Chatrath, Advocate for the respondent. A.N. Jindal, J (Oral) The petitioners have invoked the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the orders dated 10.2.2009 (Annexure P1) passed by the trial court as well as dated 27.11.2010 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Patiala. The first appellate court while dismissing the application for permitting the petitioner to pursue his appeal as an indigent person observed that, he admitted having some room and plot in his name, but he did not disclose the same in the application. It was further observed that some land is in the name of his sons which they had received by way of collusive decree. All this goes to show that the petitioner has got ancestral land transferred in the name of his sons by suffering collusive decree. As such, he cannot be declared to be an indigent person and the application has been moved just to avoid the court fee. Dismissed. October 17, 2011 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge