APCRPCO Section 30 : Form of Vakalat

Explanation using Example

Example 1: Representation in Execution Proceedings

Introduction: Ramesh has won a civil suit against his neighbor, Suresh, regarding a property dispute. The court has passed a final decree in favor of Ramesh, but Suresh has not complied with the court's order to vacate the property.

Application: According to the Andhra Pradesh Civil Rules Of Practice And Circular Orders, 1990, specifically Chapter-III, Rule 30, Ramesh's advocate can continue to represent him in all execution and miscellaneous proceedings related to the suit. The Vakalat in Form No. 12 authorizes the advocate to act on Ramesh's behalf in these subsequent proceedings.

Outcome: Ramesh's advocate files for execution of the decree to enforce the court's order. The court processes the execution application, and Suresh is legally compelled to comply with the decree. If Suresh fails to comply, he may face further legal action, including contempt of court.

Conclusion: Compliance with Rule 30 ensures that Ramesh's advocate can efficiently handle all necessary legal actions post-decree, facilitating the enforcement of the court's decision.

Example 2: Miscellaneous Proceedings Post-Decree

Introduction: Priya has been awarded a financial settlement in a civil suit against a company for breach of contract. After the final decree, the company files a miscellaneous petition to modify the payment terms due to financial difficulties.

Application: Under Rule 30 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Rules Of Practice And Circular Orders, 1990, Priya's advocate, authorized by the Vakalat in Form No. 12, can represent her in these miscellaneous proceedings. This authorization allows the advocate to argue against the modification of payment terms.

Outcome: Priya's advocate successfully argues that the company's financial difficulties do not warrant a modification of the payment terms. The court dismisses the company's petition, and the original payment terms remain in effect.

Conclusion: The provision ensures that Priya's advocate can continue to protect her interests in any proceedings related to the original suit, maintaining the integrity of the court's decree.