JUDGMENT Mukerji and Bennet, JJ. - This is an application in revision by one Swami Dayal minor against an order of the learned Subordinate Judge of Cawnpore passed under Order 22, Rule 5 Code of CPC refusing to enter the name of the applicant as legal representative of a deceased Plaintiff. The facts are that the Plaintiff in question died on 24th April, 1932, and he left two daughters Mst. Indravati and Mst. Amrawati and the applicant is the son of Mst. Indravati. 2. The applicant' claimed to be entered on the ground that he was the sole legatee of a particular property in dispute in this suit. The Court on the 13th August, 1932, directed that the parties should produce their evidence to support their claims and the 19th October, was fixed for production of evidence. On the 19th October, an application was made by the applicant in revision asking for further opportunity to summon the will in question from a mutation file. The Judge considered that further opportunity should not be given and accordingly as the applicant had no evidence of his claim his application to be entered was refused and the finder was that the name of his mother and her sister should be entered as Plaintiffs and the suit should proceed. 3. It is claimed that a revision will lie against this order. But we consider that the Judge had jurisdiction to hear and reject the application of the application the Judge has not acted with material irregularity in the exercise of that jurisdiction. Therefore we consider that no revision lies and accordingly we dismiss this application in revision with costs.