https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168867 In proceedings under Order 33 CPC, discovery of documents is permissible because the inquiry into pauperism is part of the suit and the opposite party has a real interest in testing the applicant's means; the discovery order was therefore valid, and privilege objections arise only after discovery and filing of the affidavit of documents. Revisional interference under Section 115 CPC is limited to jurisdictional error, failure to exercise jurisdiction, or material irregularity, and does not extend to correcting mere factual or legal error in a discretionary interlocutory order. The High Court exceeded that limit in disturbing the trial court's refusal to grant time and dismissal of the in forma pauperis application. en-us Wed, 19 Jul 1972 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Nov 2015 16:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168867 In proceedings under Order 33 CPC, discovery of documents is permissible because the inquiry into pauperism is part of the suit and the opposite party has a real interest in testing the applicant's means; the discovery order was therefore valid, and privilege objections arise only after discovery and filing of the affidavit of documents. Revisional interference under Section 115 CPC is limited to jurisdictional error, failure to exercise jurisdiction, or material irregularity, and does not extend to correcting mere factual or legal error in a discretionary interlocutory order. The High Court exceeded that limit in disturbing the trial court's refusal to grant time and dismissal of the in forma pauperis application. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 19 Jul 1972 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168867