JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Qamaruddin. The revision is directed against the order dt. 7.2.97 passed on an application under Order 6, Rule 18 of the code of Civil Procedure. The amendment in the claim petition was allowed on the application of the claimant vide order dt. 25.9.96. The amendment was for adding the name of New India Insurance Company as one of the respondents. The application was allowed and the Court passed the following order : ^^ vr% vkosnu Lohdkj fd;k tkrk gSA vkosnd vkt gh la"kks/ku ds ek/;e ls vkt gh la"kks/ku lekfgr djsaA** and the matter was posted for 22nd January 97. Application under Order 6, Rule 18 CPC was moved on 30th January, 97 by the same counsel without showing any cause, on which application the Court passed the order on 7.2.97 which is subject matter of the present revision. It is not only a case of disobedience of the orders of the Court but also a misconduct on the part of the concerned lawyer and such a tendency needs to be curbed. Though it is obligation of the Bar Council to deal with the misconduct but the Bar Council is not that much vigilant as is required. The provision of law is for serving the distressed people in the society who come to the Court for justice not for the purpose of causing harassment to them. It is a case of serious misconduct and amounts to contempt of Court. Before the order could be completed Shri Qamaruddin prayed that he may be permitted to withdraw the revision. Prayer of the learned counsel is accepted though reluctantly on account of the fact that he has stated that he only practices in the High Court and very much interested in maintaining dignity of the Court. Learned counsel also states that he would instruct the lawyer appearing in the Court below to remain careful in future and to see that the orders of the Court are punctually followed without any deviation. In view of above, learned counsel is permitted to withdraw the revision. It is accordingly dismissed.