RFA No.96 of 2007 9.7.2008 Present: Mr. Ravinder Thakur, Central Govt. Counsel, for the appellant. Mr. A.K. Bansal, Addl. A..G. for respondent No.2. Office has reported that Man Dass respondent No.1 had died in the year 1997. No steps have been taken for bringing on record the legal representatives of respondent No.1. The notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published in the Rajpatra on 25.6.1995 and the award was made by the Collector on 24.11.1997 as noticed in the impugned award. The learned Addl. District Judge ( Fast Track), Kullu decided Ref. Pet. No.89/02, RBT No.86/-04- 44/05 by common award on 24.3.2005. As per Registry, respondent No.1 Man Dass had died in the year 1997. It is not made clear from the record where the proceedings were pending when respondent No.1 Man Dass died but certainly this respondent died much before the filing of the present appeal. In Pritam Singh versus Rattan Chand, Latest HLJ 2006 (HP) 649, it has been held that where a party dies pending suit or appeal and judgment, decree are passed in ignorance to such death, the question of substitution of heirs and setting aside the abatement, if any, can only be considered by the Court before whom the suit or appeal as the case may be was pending when defendant or respondent expired. In these circumstances award dated 24.3.2005 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Kullu in Ref. Pet. No.89/02, RBT No.86/04-44/05, titled Man Dass vs. Collector is set aside and case is sent back to learned Addl. District Judge ( Fast Track), Kullu who will ascertain the stage of proceedings when respondent No.1 Man Dass died and thereafter shall pass the appropriate order and proceed with the appeal in accordance with law. The appeal, as well as all other pending applications are disposed of accordingly. ( Kuldip Singh) Judge July 9, 2008 (sks)