It is brought to the notice of this Court that the first respondent Palammal Nadachi died on 02.09.2000. Though the death of the first respondent was reported by the learned counsel for the respondents by a memo dated 17.06.2009, no steps have been taken to bring on record the legal representatives of the first respondent. The respondents 1 and 2 are the adjacent owners and entitled to the same compensation. Though in connected appeals the compensation has been refixed by this Court at Rs.1,000/- per cent as against the award of the Tribunal fixing compensation of Rs.1,500/- per cent, this Court is not able to appreciate the long delay in taking steps to implead the legal representatives of the first respondent on record.
2. Considering the fact that the acquisition was made in the year 1985, keeping this appeal pending at this stage will be detriment to the interest of the respondents. Hence, this appeal is dismissed as abated as against the first respondent. Since the appeal cannot be proceeded only against the second respondent who has joined with the first respondent for a common reference this Court is inclined to dismiss the appeal as against the second respondent also. Hence this Appeal Suit is dismissed. No costs.
To
1. The Subordinate Judge, Nagercoil
2. The Record Keeper, V.R.Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. .