ORDER : The respondent in the lower Court is the petitioner before me. During the pendency of an appeal in the District Court, Ramanathapuram, respondents 1 to 7 and 9 in the said appeal filed an application under O. 3, R. 4, Civil P.C., to revoke the vakalat given by their power-of-attorney agent Muthuraja Thevar, to the advocate now on record in the said appeal. The applicants in the lower Court as above are hereinafter referred to by me as principals. Muthuraja Thevar will be referred to as the agent. The principals under Ex. A-1, dated 29-7-1961, appointed an agent to be in charge of their family litigation. Even by the time Ex. A-1 was executed, the agent incurred certain expenses on behalf of the principals to conduct certain proceedings under S. 145, Crl. P.C., before the Revenue Divisional Officer. In consideration of such services in the past and to initiate further legal proceedings in connection with the family and its properties, the principals appointed the agent under a general power-or-attorney dated 29-7-1963. A translation of the same is extracted as it would be necessary in the case :

"In view of the fact that we are unable to unitedly manage and improve the income

Click Here to Read the rest of this document