vakalat

of course it is necessary because the restoration case is a separate proceeding.

Fresh vakalath is not necessary for filing a restoration petition by the same advocate. But it is necessary to file a fresh vakalath, if the petition is filed by another Advocate.

Mr Rajkumar is correct.

 RAJ IS CORRECT,HERE, EVEN NO NOC IS NEEDED FROM OLD LAWYER.

yes, the learned  members of the club are right, pl implement their advice.

Mr. Rajkumar and Mr. Reddy are right.

Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh may also be right as per local practices in his State.

Under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India read with s. 122 of CPC, High Courts are empowered to make rules to regulate their own procedure and procedures to be followed by civil courts subect to their superintendence. In UP the rules regulating the proceedure of civil courts are called "General  Rules (Civil)". These rules are in addition to CPC.

Similarly, for criminal courts, there are "General Rules (Criminal) framed under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India read with s. 477, Cr.PC.

Thus, there are  separate rules for distinct States framed by each High Court .

i appreciate quick comments.

yes, very recently i heard that the hon court has requested to file a fresh vakalth though in the dismissed suit the party was represented by the same lawyers. i think this is a good practice. 

In Allahabad High Court fresh vakalath is not needed when restoration application is filed by the Advocate who was already on record before dismissal of the case.

the rule is same for respondents.

Please see the provision contained in Order 3, Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Order 3 R 4 - "--appointment shall be deemed to be in force ------untill all proceedings in the suit are ended ---"

Explanation.- " ---- following shall be deemed to be proceeding in the suit,-

(a) (b) (c) (d) 

Allahabad High Court Amendment:

(e) ---

(f) An application under Rule 4 or Rule 9 of Order IX of this Code

 Ya Raj Kumar sir is correct

No. Fresh Vakalat (or Vakalatnama) is not required to be filed by the same advocate for filing an application restoration of a suit dismissed in default. Order 3, Rule 4 of the CPC specifically includes acts after decision of the suits wihtin the ambit of vakalat filed in the suit and almost all the High Courts have made amendments to include therein applications for restoration of a suit.

The same is also applicable mutatis mutandis to the respondents.

Interesting comments.

Another exmplaination i got: Restoration petition is a separate petition itself.  So, the vakalat of the dimissed petition has no bearing no bearing on it (as it is alreay disposed). Therefore, you need fresh vakalat irrespective of the lawyer. If you are appointing a different lawyer no NOC is required.

Technically, after the dismissal of the suit the "contract" between the petitioner and his/her lawyer comes to an end and petitioner is free to take his/her decisions...

But if the suit is "in progress" NOC is very much necessary.