Courtney-Terrell, C.J.This is an application under Order XLIV, Rule 1, of the CPC for leave to prefer an appeal in forma pauperis. The applicant was the defendant in the suit which was an ordinary mortgage suit by the mortgagee. The mortgage was for a sum of about Rs. 28,000 and the mortgage debt has increased since the date of the mortgage to about Rs. 33,000. The mortgage was by the members of a joint Hindu family. The applicant, however, and his son are the only appellants from the mortgage-decree out of the total number of mortgagors, the members of the same Hindu family But it is clear that if the various defences to the mortgage suit including plea of non-execution of the mortgage were to succeed the other members of the Hindu family would benefit by the decision that the mortgage had not been executed. The applicant, who, as I have said, together with his son is the only appellant comes before us for leave to appeal as a pauper and it is obligatory upon him under the rules to set forth, as provided by Order XXXIII, Rule 2, of the Code of Civil Procedure, a schedule of any moveable or Immovable property belonging to him with the estimated value thereof; and it has to be signed and verified in the manner prescribed for the signing and verification of pleadings, In making the application in the prescribed form the applicant produces an affidavit in which he sets forth his alleged poverty and the fact that he is unable to pay the Court-fee and the only schedule which he provides is a list of a few utensils and clothes of trifling value. He does not set forth the value of his share of the equity of redemption of the mortgage in suit, and that some value attaches to that equity of redemption is beyond any doubt whatever. The successful plaintiffs who oppose this application have made an affidavit to the effect that the equity of redemption has not been set out by the applicant and that the equity of redemption is of considerable value. They also state that the applicant is interested in two other properties of neither of which are particulars set forth in his affidavit. In reply to the affidavit of the plaintiffs, the applicant sets forth an affidavit in which he endeavours to explain that the equity of redemption in the mortgage suit is practically valueless and he attempts to set forth that his interest, such as it is in the other properties mentioned by the plaintiffs in their affidavit is in fact of no value. But the fact remains that he had the interest and that his own affidavit should have set that interest forth at length and should have stated with the clearest good faith. what it was worth, if anything. It is most important that all applications for leave to sue or prefer appeals in forma pauperis should set forth with the utmost good faith, as in the disclosure of assets in insolvency proceedings the whole of the assets of the applicant. It is the practice that notice of the application is sent to the Government Pleader in order that an investigation may be made by Government officials into the truth or otherwise of the applicants statements of fact and, therefore, it is incumbent upon the applicant to state with the utmost good faith all the necessary materials for such an investigation. If he merely states that he is a poverty stricken individual with no assets but a few valueless articles and conceals the fact that he has interest in properties of, however, little ultimate value, it is impossible for the enquiry to be conducted with any efficiency. Therefore, it must be understood in future that if it should be revealed in the course of the hearing of the application that the applicant has not stated with the utmost good faith the whole of his assets the application will be rejected at the very earliest stage.

2. Mr. Khurshaid Hussain on behalf of the applicant has contended that it is incumbent upon us to send the matter down for enquiry before the Subordinate Judge as is provided by Order XLIV, Rule 2 in order that his statements may be investigated with the assistance of the other side. The requirement that we should send such matters to a lower Court for investigation only applies when the facts have been, in the first place, set out with the utmost good faith by the applicant and upon that statement there is shewn to be a contest between the applicant and the opposite party as to the truth or otherwise of the statements. But once it is shown that the application does not set forth his assets with the utmost good faith it is open to us to reject it ab initio and not to send it down for further enquiry. I would, therefore, reject this application with costs. Hearing-fee two gold mohurs. Time is granted to pay the Court-fee up to the 25th February, 1930.

James, J.

3. I agree