127 IN THE HIGH OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.6700 of 2025 Date of Decision: September 22, 2025 Resham . . . . Pe++oner Vs. Med Singh and others . . . . Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Mr. Himanshu Sharma, Advocate for the peoner. DEEPAK GUPTA, J. By way of this revision peon filed under Arcle 227 of the Constuon of India, peoner has assailed the order dated 09.07.2025 passed by learned District Judge, Rewari, whereby applicaon bearing No. CM-188 of 2023 for se0ng aside an order dated 24.08.2022 (Annexure P-5) and for restoraon of the appeal, has been dismissed. 2. A perusal of the paper book would reveal that Civil Suit No.513 of 2017 filed by the plainffs – Med Singh and others (respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein) for seeking declaraon in respect of lease deeds Nos. 164 dated 29.07.1982 and 660 dated 10.08.2009 as null and void, besides seeking decree for joint possession and recovery of lease amount of 03 years and mesne profit, was decreed by the trial Court on 17.01.2020 (Annexure P-1) against defendant No.1 – Smt. Resham (peoner herein) and other defendants (proforma respondents herein). Peoner – defendant No.1 filed appeal (Annexure P-2) before learned District Judge, Rewari through Sh. Man Singh Gupta and Sh. Mukesh Gupta, Advocates. 3. On 24.08.2022, Sh. Mukesh Gupta, Advocate, represenng the peoner (appellant before the Appellate Court) made the following statement (Annexure P-4):- “Stated that as per the instrucons of the applicant, I do not want to proceed further with the present appeal and want to withdraw the same. I may kindly be allowed to withdraw as such.” Sarita Rani 2025.09.24 09:58 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order CR No.6700 of 2025 2025:PHHC:131499 4. Based upon the aforesaid statement, the appeal was dismissed as withdraw on 24.08.2022 itself vide Annexure P-5. 5. Since the said appeal was dismissed as withdrawn vide order Annexure P-5 in Daily Lok Adalat, in view of the statement (Annexure P-4) made by the counsel, the peoner approached this Court by filing CWP No.6496 of 2023, assailing the order dated 24.08.2022, which was disposed of by this Court on 26.04.2023 vide Annexure P-6 by passing the following order:- “The present peon has been filed for raising challenge to the order dated 24.08.2022 (Annexure P-8) passed by the learned District Judge-cum-Presiding Officer, Daily Lok Adalat, Rewari in Civil Appeal No.32 of 2020 vide which the appeal filed by the peoner against the contesng respondents was dismissed as withdrawn on the statement of the counsel for the peoner-appellant. The abovesaid statement made by the counsel for the peoner in appeal has been appended by the peoner as Annexure P-9 alongwith the present peon. It is evident from the perusal of the said statement that the same has been made before regular Court of District Judge and not before the Daily Lok Adalat. Apparently, it was on the statement made by the counsel for the peoner-appellant before the District Judge that the maDer was thereaEer taken up in the Daily Lok Adalat on the same day and the appeal was permiDed to be withdrawn in view of the statement. Learned counsel has raised a challenge only to the final order dated 24.08.2022 which was passed in the Daily Lok Adalat without raising a challenge to the statement made by the counsel for the appellant- peoner before the regular Court of District Judge. In the absence of challenge and/or withdrawal of the aforesaid statement made by the counsel before the regular Court, the Award alone, which is based upon such statement, cannot be challenged in the writ peon since the order is consequenal. Sarita Rani 2025.09.24 09:58 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order CR No.6700 of 2025 2025:PHHC:131499 Further, on a pointed query raised to the counsel for the peoner as to whether any proceedings had been iniated against the counsel for allegedly having made a statement for withdrawing the appeal without any authorizaon, he contends that no such acon has been taken by the peoner. It was further posed to the peoner as to whether a statement for seeking withdrawal of the appeal could have been made by the counsel in exercise of the authority vested in him as per the Power of ADorney executed in his favour, he fails to refer to any law or to the Power of ADorney to buDress his statement that the withdrawal of appeal could not have been done by the counsel. Under the given circumstances, I find no reason to interfere with the order that was passed on 24.08.2022 by the Daily Lok Adalat relying on the statement recorded before the regular Court. The present peon is accordingly, dismissed. Needless to menon that dismissal of the present peon shall not be a bar against the peoner to take recourse to his remedies in accordance with law against the statement so made before the regular Court for redressal of his grievances.” 6. Pursuant to the aforesaid order dated 26.04.2023 (Annexure P- 6) of this Court, peoner moved an applicaon (Annexure P-7) before District Court for se0ng aside the order dated 24.08.2022, contending that statement had been made by Sh. Mukesh Gupta, Advocate, without any prior permission or consultaon or informaon to the peoner-appellant. That applicaon was strongly opposed by the respondents of the appeal, i.e. plainffs. Learned District Judge, Rewari by way of impugned order dated 09.07.2025, has dismissed the applicaon, which is now assailed before this Court. 7. It is contended by learned counsel for the peoner that an advocate cannot withdraw an appeal without explicit instrucons from the client and that doing so may lead to restoraon of the appeal, if it contravenes the client’s interest. Learned counsel has placed reliance upon Sarita Rani 2025.09.24 09:58 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order CR No.6700 of 2025 2025:PHHC:131499 “Sash Kumar v. SDO (Operaon) Sub Division, DHBVN Narwana and others”, 2023(4) Law Herald 3369. 8. Before considering the contenon of learned counsel for the peoner, it will be relevant to reproduce the observaons made by learned District Judge, Rewari in para No.10 of the impugned order dated 09.07.2025, which read as under:- “10. The grievances of the applicant Resham is that she had not instructed her counsel Sh. Mukesh Gupta, Advocate to give statement that as per the instrucons of the appellant, he does not want to proceed further with the present appeal and wants to withdraw the same and that he may kindly be allowed to withdraw as such. She has submiDed that on the basis of this statement of Sh. Mukesh Gupta, Advocate, her appeal was dismissed as withdrawn in the Daily Lok Adalat, Rewari on 24.08.2022. AdmiDedly, the applicant Resham has not taken any objecon against Sh. Mukesh Gupta, Advocate for giving his statement in the Court on her behalf as her counsel has in the Hon’ble High Court also admiDed that no acon has been taken against Sh. Mukesh Gupta, Advocate. There is no record on the file that even an applicaon had been filed in the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana against Sh. Mukesh Gupta, Advocate for giving his statement on her behalf allegedly without her instrucons which led to the dismissal of her appeal as withdrawn. Although, the applicant has sought the se0ng aside of the impugned order dated 24.08.2022 and the statement given by counsel Sh. Mukesh Gupta, Advocate in the Court on her behalf but the file reveals that said Sh. Mukesh Gupta, Advocate has not been arrayed as a party in the applicaon. His statement on behalf of applicant Resham is sll standing on the court file. Without his (Sh. Mukesh Gupta, Advocate) explanaon or without arraying him as a necessary party, how it can be believed that now Resham applicant is telling correct that she had not instructed Sh. Mukesh Gupta, Advocate to give statement on her behalf. Had there been any complaint against Sh. Mukesh Gupta, Advocate on her behalf to the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh or filing of the suit against him for damages or for declaraon to set aside the said statement, the maDer would had been different. Therefore, in the considered opinion of the Court, without arraying Sh. Mukesh Gupta, Advocate as a necessary party in the Sarita Rani 2025.09.24 09:58 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order CR No.6700 of 2025 2025:PHHC:131499 present applicaon or without his explanaon to set aside the statement dated 24.08.2022 of Sh. Mukesh Gupta, Advocate and the order of the then learned District Judge-cum-Presiding Officer, Daily Lok Adalat, Rewari, the applicaon cannot succeed. Therefore, the applicaon of the applicant is dismissed with no order as to costs. File be tagged with the main case file.” 9. The aforesaid observaons made in the impugned order passed by learned District Judge, Rewari, as well as the observaons made earlier by this Court in the order dated 26.04.2023 (Annexure P-6) passed in CWP No.6496 of 2023, leave no manner of doubt that though the peoner claimed that her counsel, Sh. Mukesh Gupta, Advocate, wrongly gave a statement in the Daily Lok Adalat on 24.08.2022 and that she wished to withdraw her appeal, leading to its dismissal, but she neither raised any objecon against him earlier nor filed any complaint before the Bar Council or any court. Further, she did not implead him as a party in the present applicaon. Since his statement remained on record and could not be disbelieved without his explanaon or presence as a party, the Court rightly held that the applicaon was not maintainable. 10. As per the statement made on 24.08.2022 (Annexure P-4), Sh. Mukesh Gupta, Advocate had specifically stated that he was withdrawing the appeal as per instrucons of the appellant. 11. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court does not find any illegality or perversity in the impugned order passed by learned District Judge, Rewari, whereby the applicaon for se0ng aside the impugned order dated 24.08.2022, has been dismissed. Finding no merit in the present revision peon, the same is hereby dismissed. September 22, 2025 Sarita (DEEPAK GUPTA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Whether reportable? Yes/No Sarita Rani 2025.09.24 09:58 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order