The court may restore a Civil suit if misguidance from counsel affects the withdrawal of the application, invoking inherent powers under Section 151 CPC.

JUDGMENT :

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

1. Present revision petition is filed for setting aside order dated 25.07.2024 whereby the application filed by the petitioner for recalling order dated 08.05.2023 and for restoration of civil suit bearing CS No. 2502/2022 titled as ‘Nidhi Agarwal vs. Amit Kumar Adhana’, was dismissed by learned Civil Judge (Jr.Divn.) Gurugram.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) Gurugram has wrongly dismissed the application filed by the petitioner for recalling order dated 08.05.2023. He further contends that due to wrong advice given by the previous counsel of the petitioner, the civil suit bearing CS No. 2502/2022 titled as ‘Nidhi Agarwal vs. Amit Kumar Adhana’ filed by the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to file a fresh and the petitioner should not suffer because of wrong advice of the previous counsel of the petitioner. He further submits that no prejudice would be caused to the respondent, since the counter claim filed by him is still pending. Further, since the petitioner filed civil suit for recovery of Rs.58,87,380/- against the respondent, the petitioner would suffer huge loss if the suit is not pursued. Since the petitioner had already paid the Court fee at the time of filing of the previous suit, she would have to deposit the Court fee again if the civil suit is filed afresh. He, therefore, prays that the present petition be allowed and her application for restoration of civil suit bearing CS No. 2502/2022 titled as ‘Nidhi Agarwal vs. Amit Kumar Adhana’, be allowed.

3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent contends that the application filed by the petitioner has rightly been dismissed, since the petitioner is lying on oath that the suit was withdrawn due to improper advice given by the previous counsel. He, therefore, prays that the present petition be dismissed.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole file of this case with their able assistance.

5. A bare perusal of the file shows that the petitioner filed suit for recovery of Rs. 58,87,380/- against the respondent. The respondent filed counter claim in the same suit filed by the petitioner bearing CS No. 2502/2022 titled as ‘Nidhi Agarwal vs. Amit Kumar Adhana’. The petitioner who was appearing in person and was represented by her counsel, suffered a statement that she does not want to proceed further with the suit due to some technical defects and prayed for dismissal of the same as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh. The same was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh, vide order dated 08.05.2023. Thereafter, on 25.07.2024, the petitioner moved an application for restoration of the suit by stating therein that the suit was withdrawn with liberty to file fresh on 08.05.2023 due to wrong advice given by her previous counsel. She further stated that she should not suffer due to wrong advice given by her previous counsel. The respondent filed reply to the same stating therein that petitioner has stated wrong facts on affidavit and the said suit was withdrawn by the petitioner herself. 6. Admittedly, the petitioner filed previous suit for recovery of Rs.58,87,380/- against the respondent. A perusal of order dated 08.05.2023 shows that though the petitioner was represented by the counsel still she made a statement to withdraw the civil suit with a liberty to file a fresh one.

7. A perusal of the file shows that it is because of wrong advice given by the previous counsel of the petitioner as well as lack of legal knowl