Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 4,96

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. III, R. 4 & S. 96---Authority of Pleader---Scope---Suit dismissed as withdrawn on the statement of pleader---Restoration---Authority of a pleader---Consenting order/decree---Appeal---Maintainability---Judicial proceedings---Presumption of truth---Scope---Contention of petitioners was that their counsel, without any authority or permission got recorded his statement for withdrawal of the suit---Validity---Counsel for the applicants was duly appointed counsel in the suit, who was vested with the authority to do any act on their behalf---Statement of counsel was recorded who appended his signature in token of correctness of the same---Said statement was binding upon the applicants in circumstances---Authority of a pleader duly appointed by a person to act on his/her behalf in a Court would be deemed to be in force until determined with the leave of the Court by a writing signed by the client or pleader and filed in Court or until client or the pleader died or until all proceedings in the suit ended---Party was bound by the statement of his counsel unless there was contrary in the power of attorney placing restriction on the authority of counsel to compromise or abandon the claim on behalf of his client---Suit was decided with the consent of the parties on the basis of statement of counsel for the applicants---Such a consenting order/decree was not appealable in terms of S.96, C.P.C.---Appeal against the order of withdrawal of suit was not maintainable in circumstances---Nothing was on record that statement recorded by the counsel on behalf of applicants lacked authority---Presumption of truth was attached to the judicial proceedings which could not be altered or swayed at the whims of the parties---Applicants had approached the Court with mala fide intention and their act of accusing their duly appointed counsel would give a bad taste to the legal profession---Appellate Court had rightly dismissed the appeal filed by the applicants---No illegality or irregularity had been pointed out in the impugned orders passed by the Courts below---Revision was dismissed with costs in circumstances. Hassan Akhtar and others v.…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492