Waiver

--- O. III, R. 1 --- Vakalatnama --- Withdrawal of application --- Waiver --- Estoppel --- Scope --- Petitioner being defendant in a suit for dissolution of marriage and recovery of dower filed an application seeking setting aside of ex parte decree/proceedings, which application was, however, later on, withdrawn --- Again, the petitioner filed another application for recalling of the order of withdrawal of earlier application on the plea that no instructions for withdrawal of the application were conveyed to the counsel but the petitioner failed to get a favourable order as the said subsequent application was dismissed --- Held; though the petitioner sought setting aside of ex parte decree by filing an application under sub-section (6) of Section 9, Family Courts Act, 1964 but later on, he withdrew the same, meaning thereby he acquiesced of the decree and waived off his right to further agitate it --- So far as the filing of subsequently application for recalling of the above said order, as purportedly, no instructions for withdrawing the above said application for setting aside ex parte decree/proceedings to the counsel, were conveyed is concerned, suffice it to say that the said order was passed after the statement of the duly engaged counsel of the petitioner because engagement of the said counsel under Order III, Rule 1, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is admitted one; therefore, the petitioner cannot take a summersault as the act of duly engaged counsel is considered as that of the person, who engages him/her and the petitioner is bound by the acts of his counsel --- By singing a Wakalatnama all the powers including withdrawal of suit or to take any step and conduct proceedings is delegated upon the counsel --- In this view of the matter, the principle of estoppel fully attracts against the petitioner --- Leave to appeal was refused.