Gujarat High Court High Court

Kakiben vs Unknown on 20 July, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Kakiben vs Unknown on 20 July, 2010
Author: Akshay H.Mehta,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

MCA/3238/2006	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

MISC.CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR INDIGENT PERSON No. 3238 of 2006
 

In


 

FIRST
APPEAL (STAMP NUMBER) No. 310 of 2005
 

 
 
=========================================================

 

KAKIBEN,WD/O
PAULBHAI RATNABHAI CHAUHAN & 6 - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

VIJAYKUMAR
DEVRAJ SHARMA & 3 - Opponent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
AV PRAJAPATI for
Applicant(s) : 1 - 3,5 - 6. 
RULE UNSERVED for Opponent(s) :
1, 
RULE NOT RECD BACK for Opponent(s) : 2, 
MR GC MAZMUDAR for
Opponent(s) : 3, 
MR HG MAZMUDAR for Opponent(s) : 3, 
MR IM
PANDYA A.G.P. for Opponent(s) :
4, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE AKSHAY H.MEHTA
		
	

 

	  
Date : 07/03/2007 

 

 
ORAL
ORDER

1. This
is an application by the original claimant praying for prosecuting
the appeal as indigent person. Along with the application, he has
attached the schedule of his property. It shows that the applicant
possesses articles worth Rs.1,000=00 only. In view of the same, it
clearly appears that he is not in a position to pay the requisite
Court fees at this stage. It is stated in the application that even
before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal he had prosecuted the
proceedings as an indigent person. It is further stated by Mr.
Prajapati learned advocate for the applicants that though the award
of Rs.1,65,200=00 had been passed by the Tribunal in his favour and
this appeal is for seeking enhancement of the compensation, the award
amount has not been deposited by the insurance company in the
Tribunal. In view of the same, this application deserves to be
allowed and it is allowed. The applicant is permitted to prosecute
the First Appeal as an indigent person.

2. In
view of the above, the application stands disposed of. Rule is made
absolute.

[Akshay
H. Mehta, J.]

/phalguni/

   

Top