- (1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order of the Additional District Judge, Amritsar whereby he dismissed the application filed by the petitioner for restoring the appeal against its original number and disposing of the same on merits. 2 The petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) filed a suit for declaration to the effect that he was owner in possession of the disputed land. The suit was contested by the respondents and was dismissed by judgment and decree dated March 3, 1984, The plaintiff challenged the same in first appeal. The appeal came up for hearing before the First Appellate Court on March 20, 1986 and the following order was passed : "the counsel for the appellant has made a statement that he withdraws this appeal In view of the statement of the counsel for the appellant, this appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs of this appeal. " 3. An application dated April 24,1986 was moved by the petitioner for recalling the order vide which the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. It was stated therein that on the date when the appeal was fixed for arguments, he was implicated in a case under Section 302 IPC and he surrendered before Judicial Magistrate, Tarn Taran on February 25, 1986 and was confined in Central Jail, Amritsar. He never authorised his counsel Shri H. S. Malhi to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was withdrawn by the counsel without his permission: The wife of the applicant and her father came to enquire from Shri H. S. Mahli about the fate of the appeal on March 24, 1986 when they were told that- the same was dismissed on March 20, 1986. She applied for a certified copy of the order passed by the Appal late Court which was made available on April 15, 1986 and only then it was revealed that the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn on the basis of the statement of Shri H. S. Malhi and not on merits. 4. The factual averments made in the application were not controverted by the respondents. However, the order was justified on the ground that the counsel had authority to withdraw the appeal. 5. On the facts of the instant case, the lower Appellae Court acted illegally in dismissing the application on the ground that the lawyer bad the implied authority to withdraw the appeal. There is no express provision in the power of attorney enabling the Advocate to withdraw the appeal. The power to withdraw me appeal must be specifically given in the power of attorney and cannot be implied from the general words used therein that the counsel would conduct the appeal in the sama manner as the principal would have done. The First Appellate Court did not take another fact into consideration that the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn on March 20, 1986 as averred to in the application for recalling the order, the certified copy of the order vide which the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn was made available to the appellant's wife on April 15, 1986 and the application to recall the order was moved on April 24, 1986. This circumstance supports the appellant's version that the withdraw! was made without his consent. The Advocate could not in the absence of a specific power given to him withdraw the appeal. He has exceeded his authority. A responsible counsel in normal circumstances would have acted more cautiously and would not have withdrawn the appeal in the absence of the client or his authorised agent appearing with the Advocate on the date of hearing. I cannot commend the manner in which the application was dispossed of by the first Appellate Court. It ought to have gone into the merits of the allegations made therein after recording evidence and then decided the same, of course on evidence he could have arrived at the same conclusion. The courts have to act cautiously while passing order of the kind as in the present case. I do not think it proper to comment upon the conduct of the lawyer which to say the least cannot be condescended. 6. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed The order dated April 28, 1989 dismissing the application for recalling the order vide which the appeal was dismissed as with- drawn is set aside. The appeal is restored against its orginal number and the same will be disposed of expeditiously after notice to the parties.;