Srinivasa Aiyangar, J.

1. The respondent in this civil revision petition has not appeared and therefore on behalf of the petitioner it has been argued ex parte. But giving the matter such consideration as I have-been able to give I have come to the conclusion that the order of the lower Court was clearly wrong and without jurisdiction. The petitioner in this Court was respondent in a petition for leave to sue in forma pauperis. Pending the disposal of that petition the petitioner died, and thereupon the respondent in this Court applied to the lower Court as the mother and legal representative of the deceased petitioner to be brought on the record as the legal representative of the deceased petitioner, and for being allowed further to prosecute the petition. I do not see anything in the petition itself to the effect that she was either prepared to continue the proceedings paying the necessary Court-fee in respect of the petition allowing the same being treated as a plaint or anything to show that she herself was a pauper. The learned Subordinate Judge allowed the petition, and directed that the respondent in this Court be brought on the record as such legal representative. Th