-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA FIRST APPEAL NO. 115 OF 2006 1. Shri Josinho Correia, major of age, 2. Smt. Filomena Correia major of age, Both r/o. House No. 179, Coddeawaddo, Chinchinim, Salcete, Goa. …... Appellants V e r s u s 1. The State of Goa, Through the Chief Secretary, Secretariat Building, Panaji, Goa. 2. The Deputy Director, Rural Development Agency, South Goa, Having its office at Pajifond, Margao, …... Respondent Salcete, Goa. 3. The Executive Engineer, Works Division VI, Office of the Public Works, Department, Fatorda, Margao, Goa. 4. Village Panchayat of Chinchinim-Deussau Through its Sarpanch Office of the V. P. Chinchinim-Deussua, Chinchinim Salcete, Goa. 5. Collector of South Goa, Collectorate Building, Margao, Salcete, Goa. 6. The Mamlatdar of Salcete, South Goa, Collectorate Building, Margao, Salcete, Goa. 7. The Block Development Officer, South Goa, -2- Office of theBlock Development Officer, Margao, Salcete, Goa. (All registered addresses) …... Respondents Mr. S. Shet, Advocate for the Appellants. Ms. Sapna Mordekar, Addl. Government Advocate for the Respondents. Coram :- F. M. REIS, J Date : 22 nd November, 2011. ORAL JUDGMENT Heard Shri S. Shet, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants and Ms. Sapna Mordekar, learned Addl. Government Advocate, appearing for the Respondents. 2. The above Appeal challenges the Judgment and Decree passed by the learned Adhoc Addl. District Judge, South Goa, at Margao, dated 23.08.2005, whereby a suit filed by the Appellants for permanent injunction came to be dismissed. 3. At the hearing for the above Appeal, Ms. Mordekar, learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for the Respondents has pointed out that pursuant to the acquisition proceedings initiated by the Respondents to acquire the disputed portion of the land, the possession of the acquired portion of the land has already been taken by the Respondents. In support of the said contention, the -3- learned Addl. Government Advocate has produced the certificate from the Deputy Collector, South Goa, at Margao, dated 01.02.2011 which, inter alia, discloses that the suit portion of the property forming part of the property surveyed under no. 85/25 and 85/24, has already been acquired and the possession thereof has been taken by the Respondents. 4. In view of the said acquisition, the cause of action of the Appellants in the suit challenging the construction of road through the property of the Appellants does not survive. The learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants does not dispute that pursuant to an Award passed under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the compensation awarded for the land acquired has already been received by the Appellants. Consequently, nothing survives in the above Appeal as the cause of action itself does not survive and the suit has become infructuous. 5. In view of the aforesaid reasons, the Appeal stands dismissed. F .M. REIS, J. arp/*