P.P.Manuel v. Mary
Case brief
What is this about?
This is an ancillary order in a civil writ petition reviewing court fee orders in an underlying suit for cancellation of release deeds where the plaintiff was an indigent person. The High Court set aside previous orders.
What did the court decide?
Impugned orders dated 05.02.2011 and 26.08.2011 in O.S. No. 783/2009 set aside; Plaintiff's court fee liability remains.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH
TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/8TH KARTHIKA 1934
OP(C).No. 287 of 2012 (O)
OS.783/2009 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER(S):
- P.P.MANUEL CALLED AS ROMO, AGED 49 YEARS
- S/O.V.G.PAUL, PANAKKAL HOUSE MOOLAMPILLY P.O.,KADAMKUDY VILLAGE
- KANAYANNUR TALUK, KOCHI-27
- PHILOMINA PAUL, AGED 70 YEARS W/O.LATE PANAKKAL PAUL, PANAKKAL HOUSE MOOLAMPILLY P.O.,KADAMKUDY VILLAGE
- KANAYANNUR TALUK, KOCHI-27
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the plaintiff, being an indigent person, is liable to pay court fee in a withdrawn suit and can the court fee be recovered from him.
Whether the impugned orders regarding court fee in the underlying suit should be set aside.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
P.P.MANUEL
- respondent
MARY
Coram
V. CHITAMBARESH
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court