JUDGMENT : T.B. Radhakrishnan, J. 1. Heard. This appeal is against an order by which the Court below refused to grant leave to the appellant to sue as an indigent. 2. The suit is one seeking a declaration impeaching a sale deed and also for consequential reliefs of recovery of possession, injunction etc. What has been found by the Court below is that amounts are lying in fixed deposit. That amount is the consideration for the transaction which is impeached in the suit and, hence, a matter in dispute in the suit. We may also note that if the plaintiff were to withdraw that amount, that may be against her interest in prosecuting the suit as against the transaction which she impeaches. Therefore, that amount cannot be reckoned to determine the income for the purpose of adjudicating an application under Order XXXIII Rule 1 CPC. Hence, the application filed by the appellant before the Court below for leave to sue as an indigent was liable to be allowed. In the result, this appeal is allowed setting aside the impugned order and allowing IOP No. 1 of 2010 of the Sub Court, Ernakulam. The Court below shall number the suit and proceed with it in accordance with law. The parties are directed to mark appearance before the Court below on 18/09/2015.