Dayal, J.

1. The plaintiff is the petitioner.

2. The facts material for the decision of this case are these : The petitioner, who had been living with his sister, just on attaining majority, wanted his share in the family properties, which was refused to him, and. consequently, he filed a suit in the Court of the Special Subordinate Judge. Ranchi, for a declaration of title and recovery of possession of his one-sixth share in the properties on partition. The said properties are described in Schedule B to, the plaint. The petitioner purported to file this suit in forma pauperis, and he made an application under Order XXXIII of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking leave of the Court to sue in forma pauperis.

3. The learned Subordinate Judge, by his order dated the 4th July, 1953, held that the petitioner had omitted to include in his petition for permission to sue in forma pauperis certain properties from which he could raise the amount of Court-fee required, and therefore, he held that the petitioners application for permission to sue in forma pauperis was not maintainable.

4. It is the definite case of the petitioner that he has no possession and control over any of the pro