http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1  

PETITIONER: PAPANNA & ANR. ETC.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS. ETC.

DATE OF JUDGMENT01/11/1995

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. KIRPAL B.N. (J)

CITATION:  1996 SCC  (1) 291        JT 1995 (8)   107  1995 SCALE  (6)220

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                           W I T H                CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6260 OF 1983                          O R D E R      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.