IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH JANUARY 2008 / 19TH POUSHA 1929 CRP.No. 796 of 2005() --------------------- ORDER DT.21.6.05 IN POP.7/2003 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,NORTH PARAVUR .................... REVN. PETITIONERS: RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------ 1. SASIKUMAR, S/O. PARUKUTTY AMMA, PUSHPALAYAM VEETTIL, RAYAMANGALAM KARA, RAYAMANGALAM VILLAGE. 2. K.C. MURALEEDHARAN, S/O. PARUKUTTY AMMA VATTAKKATTU VEETTIL, RAYAMANGALAM KARA, RAYAMANGALAM VILLAGE. 3. K.N. DILEEP KUMAR, S/O. NARAYANAN KARTHA SREEVALSAM VEETTIL, RAYAMANGALAM KARA, RAYAMANGALAM VILLAGE. 4. AYYAPPAN ALIAS KUNJAPPAN, S/O. EKKORAN, VARIPPOLIKUDY VEETTIL, RAYAMANGALAM KARA, RAYAMANGALAM VILLAGE. 5. SANTHOSHKUMAR, S/O. SUBRAMONIAN KOTTAYIL VEETTIL, MUDIKKARAYIL KARA RAYAMANGALAM VILLAGE. 6. RAJAN, S/O. NARAYANA KURUP KIDANGOTH VEETTIL, RAYAMANGALAM KARA, RAYAMANGALAM VILLAGE. 7. SUDARSANAN, S/O. RAMAN KARTHA PUTHEN VEETTIL, KALLELIL, RAYAMANGALAM KARA RAYAMANGALAM VILLAGE. 8. SANKARAN, S/O. CHAKKAN, MEKKAPPADY VEETTIL, RAYAMANGALAM KARA RAYAMANGALAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANU SRI.ANOOP.V.NAIR CRP 796/05 -2- RESPONDENT: PETITIONER: ------------------------ SABU, S/O. SREEDHARAN NAIR, THATTARUKUDIYIL VEETTIL, LINGOL KARA, PERUMBAVOOR VILLAGE. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON I.A.NO.2320 OF 2005 IN C.R.P.NO.796 OF 2005 DISMISSED. 9.1.2008 SD/- PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C.R.P.No.796 of 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 9th January, 2008 ORDER Under challenge in this C.R.P. is the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, North Paravur holding that the respondents do not have the wherewithal to pay the court fee of Rs.63,750/- payable on a suit which was instituted by them as indigent persons. The grounds raised in the C.R.P. is that the respondent had suppressed the fact that they owned and possessed 12 Ares of land as per document No.443 of 2002 of S.R.O. Kuruppampady and that the salary of the respondent and his wife itself were sufficient for enabling the respondent to pay the court fee. A reading of the impugned order will show that it has been conceded by the respondent that he was having 30 cents of land which is equivalent to roughly 12 Ares. No material had been placed before the court below by the petitioners to show that the respondent is having sufficient means. The report of the learned Government Pleader on the basis of the enquiries through the village authorities was also obviously in favour of the pauperism of the respondent. I do not find any jurisdictional infirmity about the impugned order warranting C.R.P.No.796/05 - 2 - invocation of revisional jurisdiction. The C.R.P. will stand dismissed. The court below is directed to register the P.O.P. as a suit and to expedite the trial and disposal of the suit. srd PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE