M. C. DESAI, C. J. : This revision has been referred to a Full Bench by our brothers Oak and Seth who were of opinion that a decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Nur Muhammad v. Jamil Ahmad, AIR 1919 All 213, requires reconsideration.

2. There is no controversy about the facts in the case, Opposite Party No. 1, who being the contesting opposite party will be referred to as the opposite party in this judgment, filed against the applicant a suit as a pauper under O. 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure by applying for permission to sue as a pauper in the Court of a Munsif. The application was apparently in proper form and was presented by the opposite party in person. Under R. 1 of O. 33 any suit may be instituted by a pauper and under R. 2 every application for permission to sue as a pauper must contain the particulars required in regard to plaints in suits and under R. 3 it must be presented "to the Court" by the applicant in person, Where an application is in proper form and duly presented the Court is authorised to examine the applicant regarding the merits of his claim of his pauperism, vide R. 4, but if it is not framed or presented as laid down in Rr. 2 and 3 or