JUDGMENT
1. This is an application for revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure from an order of the Court below rejecting the application of Majid Huaain Khan for leave to sue in forma pauperis. The Court below undoubtedly had jurisdiction to entertain the application and to pass orders thereon. Upon a consideration of the evidence that was before it, the Court below came to the conclusion that Majid Husain Khan had failed to make out that he was a pauper. The finding of the Court below is essentially a finding of fact. No application for revision can be made under Section 115, Civil Procedure Code, which is directed against a finding arrived at by the Court below which is founded upon evidence upon a point arises from the pleadings.
2. It is argued that the Court below has not gone into the details as regards the exact property which the applicant was possessed of at the date of the application, its market value and the title thereto. Reference has been made to a decision of a single Judge in In re Muhammad Husain v. Ajudhia Prasad 10 A. 467 : A.W.N. (1888) 179. With utmost respect we are not prepared to accept the view propounded in this case. Where a Court having jurisdiction to entertain an application, upon a review of the evidence rejects that application on the merits, the Court cannot be said to have acted with material irregularity or illegality in the exercise of the j jurisdiction which it was possessed of, merely because the Court has not given detailed reasons for its view. We are clearly of opinion that the case does not fulfil the requirements of Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and reject this application with costs.