- (1.) The appellant is the son and legal representative of the original defendants to the suit, Kedarnath and Chanda Devil The respondents are the legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff, Dhanno Devi On January 2, 1948 Dhanno Devi presented an application under O. 33, Rules 2 and 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure for permission to sue as a pauper in the Court of the First Civil Judge, Kanpur. The plaint part of the application prayed for the relief of possession of a house situated in the city of Kanpur on the allegation that the house was of the ownership of one Budhu Lal - her father. Budhu Lal died in 1918 and on his death his widow Jumna Devi inherited the property. On Jumna Devi's death on December 26, 1935 Dhanno Devi, as the daughter' was entitled to succeed to the property. The defendants were in possession and were falsely refusing to yield up their possession to Dhanno Devi and hence she was required to file the suit. A very large amount had to be paid as court fee which Dhanno Devi was not in a position to pay and hence she prayed that permission may be given to her to sue as a pauper. The last date for filing the suit was December 26, 1947 but as the courts were closed for X'mas vacation the application had been presented to the court on January 2, 1948 i.e. on the re-opening of the court and thus it was claimed the suit was within limitation.
(2.) The defendants disputed the plalntiff Dhanno Devi's title contending that she was not the daughter of Budhu Lal. They also contended that the suit was barred by limitation.
(3.) The Trial Court negatived the contentions of the defendants and decreed the suit. That. decree was confirmed by the High Court of Allahabad by its Judgment dated March 31, 1965 in first Appeal No. 292/1955. The present appeal by special leave directed against the judgment of the High Court.;