Rajasthan High Court
Smt Lalita Devi And Others vs Dr Smt Siroj Vijayvargiya And ... on 19 April, 2022
Bench: Sudesh Bansal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
एस.बी.ससविल. पॉपर एपीकीकेशन न नंबर. 3/2013
अ नंतर्गत
एकलपीठ वनयमित प्रथि अपील स नंखं. 304/2013
1. शीिती लललतं दीकेिी पती शी अश्री अशोक कअशोक कुिंर, उम्र 30 िर्ग।
2. शी अश्री अशोक कअशोक कुिंर पअशोक कुत्र र भ नंिर लंल, उम्र लरर भर 38 िर्ग ।
3. शी लीलंधर पअशोक कुत्र शी अश्री अशोक कअशोक कुिंर, उम्र लरर भर 15 िंह।
(िंदी / अपीलंथ्थीरण स नंखं 3 नंबंललर जररयीके अपनीके िंतं मपतं एि नं िली
कअशोक कुदरती िंदी स नंखं 1 ि 2 )
िंदी / अपीलंथ्थी स नंखं 1 लरंयत 3 सिस्त वनिंसीरण रंगाँि परंससयं,
तहसील वकशनरढ़ , जिजलं अजिीकेर रंज।।
-------प्रंथ्थीरण /िंदीरण /अपीलंथ्थीरण
बनंि
1. डॉ। शीिती ससर्री अशोज विजयिर्थीय य सी र्री अशोर विशीकेरज, रंजकजकीय यजनंरंयण
चिवकतंलय, वकशनरढ़ जिजलं अजिीकेर ।
2. िअशोक कुख चिवकतं एि नं स्वस्थ्य असधकंरी, िअशोक कुखं बंिर, जिजलं अजिीकेर ।
3. स्वंस्थय सचिि, रंजस्थंन सरकंर, जयपअशोक कुर ।
4. िअशोक कुखं सचिि, रंजस्थंन सरकंर , जयपअशोक कुर ।
5. रंजस्थंन सरकंर जररयीके शीिंन जिजलंधीश िह्री अशोदय, जिजलंधीश अजिीकेर ।
6. ओररयण्टल इ नंशय्री अशोरीकेन्स कम्पनी ललमिलिमिटीकेड, जररयीके प्रब नंधक, रणीकेश र भिन ,
किीकेहरी र्री अशोड, अजिीकेर ।
-------अप्रंथ्थीरण /प्रवतिंदीरण /प्रत्यथ्थीरण
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kamal Kant Sharma
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
Order
(2 of 3) [CPA-3/2013]
19/04/2022
1. Applicants have filed this pauper application invoking
provisions of Order 44 Rule 1 CPC, seeking exemption from
payment of Court fees to challenge the judgment and decree
dated 01.04.2013 by way of filing first appeal.
2. It appears from record that applicants have filed a civil suit
claiming damages, due to failure of sterilization operation of
applicant No.1. Before the trial Court, applicants have paid
required Court fees of Rs.39,379/-. Their civil suit was tried on
merits and has been dismissed. Applicants want to file the first
appeal against judgment dated 01.04.2013 without payment of
Court fees.
3. At one point of time, this Court directed the Collector to hold
an enquiry about status of applicants. Thereafter, again this Court
directs the concerned additional District Judge to hold an enquiry
about indigency of applicants. In both enquiry reports, it has come
on record that applicant No.2 is running a tea stall, having an
earning of Rs.5000-5500 per month. He was found to be
handicapped and having no agricultural land. Applicants were
found that they have not taken benefit of any Government
scheme, under which Government provides ex gratia amount and
other benefits to persons living below poverty line. Further
applicants have not stated any change in circumstances occurred
after filing of civil suit with payment of Court fees, due to which
applicants have become unable to pay the Court fees at the stage
of first appeal.
4. This Court is not satisfied that applicants have not sufficient
means to pay the Court fees and case is fit for grant of exemption
(3 of 3) [CPA-3/2013]
to pay the requisite Court fees. There is no exceptional
circumstances found in the present case. It may be observed that
compensation as provided under the scheme of Government to
persons suffering from failure of sterilization operation has already
been offered to applicants.
5. Counsel for applicants submits that applicants have not
availed that ex gratia amount offered by the Government.
6. In such facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is not
inclined to allow the pauper application. Accordingly, the pauper
application No.3/2013 stands dismissed.
7. However, in case applicants are willing to pursue their claim
for damages by way of filing first appeal, they may do so by
making payment of requisite Court fees. If the requisite Court fees
is paid within a period of 60 days. The office may deal with the
first appeal filed by applicants.
(SUDESH BANSAL),J
NITIN /182
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
