PETITIONER:
PAPANNA & ANR. ETC.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS. ETC.
DATE OF JUDGMENT01/11/1995
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
KIRPAL B.N. (J)
CITATION:
1996 SCC (1) 291 JT 1995 (8) 107
1995 SCALE (6)220
ACT
HEADNOTE
JUDGMENT
WITH
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6260 OF 1983
ORDER
After Mr. K.N. Bhat was designated as Senior Advocate, the Registry had issued notices to all the appellants to make alternative arrangements as early as in 1987-88 and the same were served on all the appellants except appellant No.2 who was reported to be dead. None has entered appearance through counsel nor did they appear in person today. As a matter of fact, it is the professional duty of the counsel, on being designated as Senior Advocate, to intimate that fact to all his clients and request them to make alternative arrangements to engage another advocate-on\record. It is no part of the duty of this Court to inform the parties. However, it has already been done. In view of the fact that the decree challenging the validity of the notification under Section 4(1) of he Land Acquisition Act being common to all the appellants and being indivisible, the appeals stand abated against all since the legal representatives of the second appellant have not been brought on record till date.
The appeals are accordingly dismissed. No costs.