( 1 ) ON 4-8-1949, one Indrabala Dasi applied to the 1st Subordinate Judge of Midnapore for leave to bring and prosecute a suit as a pauper. She filed a single document which was, in form, a plaint, but contained a statement to the effect that the plaintiff was a person of no means and among the reliefs claimed was a prayer that she might be permitted to prosecute her suit in forma pauperis. On that document being presented, the learned Judge started a Miscellaneous Judicial proceeding, but while that proceeding was still pending, Indrabala died on 18-11-1949. On 17-12-1949, Indrabala's son, Phani Bhusan De, who is the Opposite Party to this rule, applied for substitution of himself in the place of Indrabala and for leave to continue the litigation on such substitution. By an order passed on the same date, the learned Judge allowed substitution as prayed for, directed the original application to be amended and directed the Opposite party to file all requisites for a fresh service of notices by a certain date. Thereafter, on 4-1-1950, the principal defendant in the intended; suit, who is the petitioner before us, filed an objection to the effect that there could be