KRISHNA KUMARI Vs. BRIJESH KUMAR GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) THIS first appeal from order was decided on merits on 13.9.2007. The Counsel for the respondent No. 3 had not appeared even in the revised list though the name of Sri A.K. Mishra was shown. Now another Counsel appear ­ing for the respondent No. 3 has moved this application for the recall of the judgment and order dated 13.9.2007 on the ground that his name was not printed.

(3.) ORDER III, Rule 4 (2), C.P.C. specifically provides that every appoint ­ment of the Counsel by party shall be deemed to be in force until determined with the leave of the Court. A Division Bench of this Court in Bijli Cotton Mills (P) Ltd. v. M/s. Chhagenmal Bestimal and others AIR 1982 Alld 183, while considering the above provision laid down that the authority of the Counsel once engaged can be terminated by the client but this cannot be done orally and must be done in writing with the permission of the Court in the manner laid down by Rule 4 (2) of Order III, C.P.C.