<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1962 (1) TMI 77 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272720</link>
    <description>At the stage of leave to sue in forma pauperis, the court must only determine whether the petition prima facie discloses a cause of action and cannot assess disputed title questions, the truth of the allegations, or possible defences; those matters belong to trial, so rejection on that basis was unsustainable. Order I Rule 10 can also be used to transpose a co-defendant as co-applicant in pauper proceedings where legally appropriate, because the application itself is the prescribed mode of instituting the suit without court-fee. The High Court&#039;s refusal on the ground that the original application was personal was therefore incorrect.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jan 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 May 2018 11:25:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=520251" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1962 (1) TMI 77 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272720</link>
      <description>At the stage of leave to sue in forma pauperis, the court must only determine whether the petition prima facie discloses a cause of action and cannot assess disputed title questions, the truth of the allegations, or possible defences; those matters belong to trial, so rejection on that basis was unsustainable. Order I Rule 10 can also be used to transpose a co-defendant as co-applicant in pauper proceedings where legally appropriate, because the application itself is the prescribed mode of instituting the suit without court-fee. The High Court&#039;s refusal on the ground that the original application was personal was therefore incorrect.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jan 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272720</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>