(1.) This appeal arises out of a dispute under section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act, for short) for apportionment of compensation. The present appeal came to be admitted on 29/11/2003. During the pendency of the appeal, some of the respondents died and there are in all three Civil Applications filed for bringing the Legal Representatives of the deceased respondents on record.
(2.) Shri Pangam, the learned Counsel for the contesting respondents, however, submitted that there was a suit filed by the party no.2 Uttam Naik Dessai for declaration that he is entitled to half of â .. -th (i.e. 3/10th share) of the compensation. That suit was filed against all the other interested parties. He submits that the suit was dismissed, which was challenged by the party no.2 before the learned District Judge. The First Appeal came to be allowed and the suit was decreed. The said judgment and decree has been confirmed by this Court in a Second Appeal. In other words, he submits that the matter stands covered and, therefore, the appeal may be taken up for final disposal.
(3.) Shri Parsekar, the learned Counsel for the appellants, in all fairness, had no objection for taking up the appeal for final disposal. He, however, submitted that the controversy in the appeal cannot be said to be covered by the decision in the Civil Suit filed by the party no.2 Uttam.