The appellant, injured in a motor accident, was awarded compensation by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal but sought enhanced compensation through an appeal filed as an indigent person due to her financial inability to pay court fees. The High Court dismissed her application, noting the compensation awarded. The Supreme Court found the dismissal improper, emphasizing that the appellant hadn't received the compensation yet and thus remained indigent. The Court allowed her appeal to proceed as an indigent person and urged the High Court to expedite the appeal's resolution.

Introduction

1. Leave Granted:
   • Quotation from State of Haryana v. Darshana Devi highlighting access to justice for the poor.

Core Issue

2. Point of Consideration:
   • Whether an award holder who hasn't received compensation can file an appeal as an indigent person.

Case Background

3. Factual Scenario:
   • Accident and Injury: Appellant injured in a bike-truck accident, sustained permanent disability.
   • Employment and Compensation Claim: Earning Rs.3,000/- per month, claimed Rs.10 lakhs compensation.
   • Tribunal Award: Rs.2,41,745/- with 9% interest awarded.

High Court Proceedings

4. Appeal to High Court:
   • Filed Regular First Appeal and application to proceed as an indigent person.
5. High Court’s Decision:
   • Application dismissed, noting awarded compensation and suggesting other remedies.

Legal Framework and Analysis

6. Concept of Indigent Person:
   • Reference to Mathai M. Paikeday v. C.K. Antony discussing indigency.
7. CPC Provisions:
   • Mechanism for indigent persons to file suits or appeals under Orders XXXIII and XLIV.
8. MV Act Appeal:
   • Section 173 MV Act relevant for appeals.
9. Order XLIV Rule 1:
   • Provision for indigent person appeals.
10. Case Law Reference:

• R.V. Dev v. Chief Secretary, Govt. of Kerala on deferred payment of court fees.
• Union Bank of India v. Khader International Construction on principles of Order XXXIII.

Supreme Court’s Observations

11. Intent of Orders XXXIII and XLIV:

• Ensuring access to justice regardless of financial capability.

12. Appellant’s Right to Appeal:

• Right to appeal for enhanced compensation recognized.

13. Access to Justice:

• Importance of effective access to justice as a basic human right.

14. State’s Role and Court Fees:

• Observations on the State’s insistence on court fees from awarded compensation.

15. High Court’s Error:

• Appellant’s indigency status not extinguished by the mere award, as she hadn't received the amount.

16. Further Grounds:

• Deferred payment of court fees as per statutory requirements.

17. Order XLIV Rule 3(2):

• Requirement for inquiry into indigency by the Appellate Court.

Conclusion and Directions

18. Supreme Court’s Decision:

• Setting aside the High Court's order, allowing the appeal to proceed as an indigent person.

19. Expedited Resolution:

• High Court requested to expedite the appeal, preferably within six months.

20. Administrative Directions:

• Immediate transmission of the judgment to the High Court Registrar General.

Pending applications stand disposed of.