Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether an Official Receiver, in whom an insolvent's estate has vested, is a "person" within the meaning of Order 33, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure so as to institute a suit as a pauper for recovery of the estate.
Analysis: The right to sue as a pauper under Order 33, Rule 1 depends on the meaning of "person" in the Explanation. The term is not defined in the Code and is capable of including natural as well as legal persons. An Official Receiver holds the estate in a representative capacity, akin to a trustee or executor, and sues not in his personal right but as the legal representative of the insolvent estate. The context and object of the provision do not compel a narrow meaning excluding such a representative capacity. Prior decisions recognising executors, administrators, trustees, and similar fiduciaries as competent to sue in forma pauperis support this construction.
Conclusion: An Official Receiver can be allowed to sue as a pauper, provided the conditions in the Explanation to Order 33, Rule 1 are satisfied. The matter was therefore remitted to the lower court to determine whether those conditions were met.
Ratio Decidendi: A person suing in a representative or fiduciary capacity, such as an Official Receiver, may fall within the expression "person" in Order 33, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and the pauper test applies to that representative capacity rather than to personal ownership alone.