IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.300 of 2008 Date of decision:18.03.2009 Piara ...Petitioner versus M/s Amar Nath Sat Pal Commission Agent, ...Respondents New Grain Market, Kaithal and another CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. Gurmail Singh Duhan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajneesh Gupta, Advocate for Mr.Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate for the respondents. 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. Revision is against an order dismissing the application filed by him for prosecuting the appeal as an indigent person. The Appellate Court before which the petition was filed had considered the fact that the defendant had sold his property after the institution of suit on 27.01.2000. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner says that the sales have been effected without any knowledge of the filing of the suit and there was no fraudulent intent. The gratuitous transfer is not a transaction which will enable a person to claim to be an indigent person. The transfer will have to be seen in the context of subsisting liability on the date of his transfer and the fact that the suit was also instituted on such liability. The disposal of the petition of the Court below in the manner in which it is shown suffers from no vice for intervention in revision. 3. Revision is dismissed. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 18.03.2009. sanjeev