SUNDAR LAL Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) OFFICE has reported that the appellant has not duly filled up vakalatnama. From the perusal of the Vakalatnama, it appears that at the place of description of person appointing an Advocate, the word "appellant" has been written only. The full name, age and address of the person who appointed the counsel has not written. This has caused confusion whether the person who has signed the Vakalatnama is the same person whose name is appearing as appellant in the cause-title.

(2.) FROM the perusal of the other files also, I have found that the vakalatnamas are being filed in following manner:-

(3.) AT this stage, learned Counsel for appellant seeks permission to make the default good in Vakalatnama. In the interest of justice, prayer allowed.