Dismissed

Jagtar Singh v. National Insurance Company Ltd.

Punjab & Haryana HC8 Jan 2013CR/63/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Order dismissing Civil Revision No. 63 of 2013. The High Court upheld the trial court's finding that the petitioner is not indigent as he owns agricultural land and likely financed his truck purchase from personal funds. Petitioner granted two months to pay ad-valorem court fee.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted two months to pay court fee on ad-valorem basis; revision dismissed.

Jagtar Singh Vs National Insurance… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

Civil Revision No. 63 of 2013

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Civil Revision No. 63 of 2013 DATE OF DECISION : January 08, 2013

Jagtar Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

The National Insurance Company Limited ...Respondent

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JEYAPAUL

¶10

Present Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

¶12

M.JEYAPAUL, J.

¶13

Heard the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the Revision petitioner.

¶14

I find that there is no merit in the Revision. The plaintiff has sought virtually for recovery of amount of 7,00,150/- with interest from the Insurance Company, though the prayer has been couched in such a way that it was for declaration that the plaintiff was entitled to the said amount. Of course, the plaintiff has sought for a direction also to the defendant to settle the claim of the plaintiff but inasmuch as he has sought for a recovery of a sum of 7,00,150/with interest, the trial Court has rightly directed the plaintiff to pay advalorem Court fee.

¶15

Arguments also were heard on the plea to declare the plaintiff as an indigent person incapable of paying Court fee.

¶16

In my considered view, the trial Court having considered

¶17

Civil Revision No. 63 of 2013 2

¶18

the fact that the plaintiff was working as a driver and he also had agricultural lands measuring 5 kanals and 12 marlas rightly dismissed the application seeking to declare him as an indigent person incapable of paying Court fee. It is also found that the plaintiff had not produced any document to show that he mobilised huge amount of rupees seven lacs from outside source for purchasing the subject truck. Infact the plaintiff has suppressed the source through which he purchased the truck paying a sum of rupees seven lacs. It will have to be presumed that he has spent from his own source a whopping sum of rupees seven lacs to purchase the truck. Such a person cannot be declared as an indigent person. The trial Court has rightly taken the view that he was not an indigent person.

¶19

The plaintiff is granted two months time from 14.01.2013 for payment of Court fee on ad-valorem basis.

¶20

With the above observation, the Revision stands

¶21

dismissed. No costs.

¶22

(M.JEYAPAUL) JUDGE

¶23

January 08, 2013 p.singh

Jagtar Singh v. National Insurance Company Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagtar Singh v. National Insurance Company Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suresh Chander Vs Prem Nath etc.

(O&M) Ajmer Singh Vs Amar Singh etc.

Ram Partap Vs Kanwar Singh

(O&M) Goga Textiles, etc. Vs Authority Under the Payment of Wages Act, Panipat etc.

(O&M) Gian Chand Vs Union of India & Anothers

(O&M) New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs Sulakhan Singh and Ors.