JUDGEMENT
RAKESH KUMAR GARG J. -
(1.)CM No.5568-C of 2010 For the reasons mentioned in the application, this application is allowed and the deficiency in the court fee and delay, if any, in making up the deficiency in court fee, is condoned. CM disposed of.
(2.)THIS appeal has been filed by the appellants challenging the money decree. Vide order dated 20.04.2010 the case was adjourned to enable the appellant to comply with the provisions of Order 41 Rule 1(3) CPC which envisages that the appellant shall deposit the amount disputed in the appeal or furnish such security in respect thereof as the court may think fit.
In the present application, the applicant has prayed that he be granted exemption from depositing/furnishing the security as envisaged aforesaid as the appellant is unable to arrange for the surety and to deposit the decretal amount. 45. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted before this Court that the appeal is likely to be accepted and thus the exemption be granted as the appellant is a poor person. However, learned counsel for the appellants/applicant is unable to support the aforesaid argument by any precedent. 5. In this view of the matter, this application is dismissed. 6. Since the appellants have failed to comply with the provisions of Order 41 Rule1(3) CPC, this appeal is dismissed.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.