MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN and others vs Mst. HANAF ILAHI and others
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal directed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court whereby a writ petition filed by respondent No. 1 was accepted and her declaratory suit was remanded to the trial court for decision on merits. The core legal question concerns whether a counsel possesses the inherent authority to withdraw a suit on behalf of a client without explicit instructions or authorization in the power of attorney. The Supreme Court held that the High Court rightly concluded, upon detailed examination of the record and the power of attorney, that no such instructions had been imparted by the litigant to her counsel for the withdrawal of her suit. Consequently, the High Court properly exercised its discretion in setting aside the lower court orders and remanding the matter. The petition was found devoid of merit and leave to appeal was declined, thereby affirming that a counsel cannot abandon or withdraw a client's suit without express authorization.
- Does a counsel have the authority to withdraw a suit without express instructions from the client?
- Can a writ petition be maintained against orders dismissing an application challenging the unauthorized withdrawal of a suit by counsel?
- Whether the High Court can properly interfere with concurrent findings regarding the lack of instructions given to a counsel.
ORDER
1. ' TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.--- Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment, dated 19-9-2002 whereby a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, accepted Writ Petition No,9910 of 2000 filed by respondent No,1 and remitted the case to the trial Court so as to proceed with it as mandated under law.
2. ' The facts briefly narrated are that respondent No,1, Mst. Hanaf Ilahi, filed a declaratory suit challenging the sale-deeds and mutations allegedly attributed to have been executed by her father. It is pertinent to mention over here that the other two sisters of respondent No,1 also filed similar suits. However, during the pendency of the same, the suit was withdrawn allegedly on the statement of the respondent by her counsel on 22-10-1997. The moment the lady came to know about this withdrawal, she assailed the above order and disowned having given any such instruction to her counsel. This application was dismissed by the trial Court on 2-10-1998. A revision petition filed by the respondent lady against the above order also met the same fate as it was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Depalpur, on 4-4-2000. Faced with this situation, respondent No,1 approached the Lahore High Court, Lahore, through aforesaid writ petition, which has been accepted and the case remitted to the learned trial Court for decision on merits by a learned Single Judge through his judgment, dated 19-9-2002, impugned herein. Hence, this petition for leave to appeal.
3. ' The only point involved in this case is, whether the learned counsel appearing for respondent No,1, had the authority to withdraw the suit in the circumstances of the case in hand. The learned Single Judge of the High Court has dealt with this matter in extenso and has come to a definite conclusion that no such instructions were ever imparted by the lady to her counsel nor they are reflected from the power of attorney executed by her. The learned Single Judge, after advancing valid reasons, has exercised the discretion properly and no exception can be taken to the same.
4. ' Resultantly, in view of the above discussion, the instant petition being devoid of any merit is dismissed and leave declined.
Cited by 6 cases
- Abdul Rasheed vs Mehboob-ul-Hassan & another 2024 LHC 1946
- Falak Sher, etc. vs Hashmat Bibi, etc. 2024 LHC 755, 2024 PLJ Lahore 322, 2024 PLJ Lahore 262, PLD 2025 Lahore
- FALAK SHER Versus HASHMAT BIBI 2025 PLD 414
- Mst. SAUMO BIBI Versus ALLAH BAKHSH 2016 YLRN 126
- HASSAN AKHTAR and others vs AZHAR HAMEED and others 2011 PLJ SC 37
- HASSAN AKHTAR Versus AZHAR HAMEED 2010 PLD 657