ORDER : 1. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants/ plaintiffs and the respondents/defendants have submitted that certain applications for substitution are pending and some respondents have not yet been served. We have been apprised in the course of hearing that certain applications for substitution have been filed and in certain appeals the respondents are the appellants. 2. In view of the aforesaid, the legal representatives who have already been substituted in place of the original appellants or respondents, copies can be served on their respective counsel and that will be treated as service. As far as the applications for substitution are concerned, they are allowed. The appellants shall take steps to effect service within two weeks hence on the unserved respondents. Dasti, in addition, is permitted. 3. Apart from that, liberty is granted to carry out the paper publication after getting the draft notice approved from the Registry. The draft notice shall be filed within two weeks hence and the paper publication shall be done in widely circulated local newspapers published in Hindi and English language in the area concerned within four weeks therefrom. 4. The prayer for deletion of any respondents in any appeal stands allowed. 5. At this juncture, an issue arose with regard to translation of the exhibited documents. It is submitted by Mr. C.S. Vaidyanathan, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants in certain appeals that the High Court has produced the translation in the judgment of the exhibited documents. Learned senior counsel for the respondents would submit that all the exhibited documents have not been translated and, in any case, certain extracts have been produced in the judgment and not the entire exhibits. Without getting into the said controversy, we are inclined to direct that the plaintiffs or the defendants in the suits, shall translate their respective exhibits. Mr. Vaidyanathan has submitted that he will be in a position to translate the documents exhibited by the plaintiffs for whom he is appearing within four weeks from today. Mr. Kapil Sibal, Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Mr. Anoop Chaudhary and Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain, learned senior counsel submit that they would require four months' time to translate the documents. 6. Regard being had to the complexity of the matter, we are inclined to grant twelve weeks to all concerned to file the English translation of the exhibited documents. Mr. Kapil Sibal, Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Mr. Anoop Chaudhary and Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain, learned senior counsel submit that they would require four months' time to translate the documents. 6. Regard being had to the complexity of the matter, we are inclined to grant twelve weeks to all concerned to file the English translation of the exhibited documents. It is hereby made clear that no adjournment shall be granted for the aforesaid purpose and both the parties shall be guided by the time frame fixed by us. 7. Mr. Tushar Mehta, learned senior counsel and Mr. Raghawendra Singh, learned Advocate General for the State of U.P. shall file the English translation of the entire oral evidence within ten weeks. Needless to say, copies of the translation shall be in bound volumes and shall be handed over to all the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 8. The applications for the intervention and impleadment shall be dealt with at the appropriate time. 9. Let these appeals be listed for hearing on 5th December, 2017.