JUDGMENT : AJAY MOHAN GOEL, J. 1. This appeal has been filed by the State alongwith an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act against the Award dated 19.09.2017, passed by the learned Land Reference Court in Reference Petition No. 41/16/2011, titled as Shri Krishan Lal Vs. Land Acquisition Officer and another. 2. When notice was issued in the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act by this Court, it transpired as per report of the Registry that sole non-applicant/respondent Shri Krishan Lal in fact had died on 19th August, 2011 itself. During the pendency of the Reference Petition, the legal representatives of Shri Krishan Lal did not move an appropriate application for substituting them as petitioners and the Reference Petition stood adjudicated upon by the learned Reference Court unaware of the factum of the death of the sole petitioner. That being so, in my considered view, in terms of the law laid down by this Court in Collector Land Acquisition NHPC Vs. Khewa Ram and others, Latest HLJ 2007 (HP) 270, the Award which stands assailed by way of this appeal has to be set at naught, as the Reference Petition in fact stood abated before the Reference Court on account of the death of sole petitioner therein. Relevant portion of the judgment of this Court in Khewa Ram and others (supra) is being quoted herein-below: “13. The question that next arises is as to what happens if the claimant has died during the proceedings. This can also happen under various circumstances, some of which the being dealt with hereunder: (a) In case there is only one claimant in an isolated case of land acquisition and the claimant dies, then obviously if the Court is unaware about the death of the claimant, it will proceed to decide the reference on material placed on record before it. In such a case, if either the legal representatives of the claimant or the acquiring authority files an appeal, then the award of the District Judge will have to be set aside and the reference proceedings deemed to have been abated. The questions whether abatement should be set aside and whether the delay, if any, should be condoned, are questions to be decided by the District Judge alone and not by the appellate Court.” 3. The questions whether abatement should be set aside and whether the delay, if any, should be condoned, are questions to be decided by the District Judge alone and not by the appellate Court.” 3. Therefore, keeping in view the fact that the Award was passed by the learned Reference Court without being aware of the factum of the death of sole petitioner before it, Award dated 19.09.2017, passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge (II), Mandi in LAC Petition No. 41/16/2011, is set aside by condoning the delay in filing the appeal, allowing the same for reasons mentioned above. The matter is remanded back to the learned Reference Court/Additional District Judge, Mandi for proceeding with the matter in accordance with law. However, legal representatives of reference petitioner Sh. Krishan Lal shall be at liberty to move an appropriate application before the learned Reference Court for substituting themselves in place of deceased petitioner as also for setting aside abatement, if any. In case such applications are filed, then the same have to be adjudicated by the learned Reference Court in accordance with law, uninfluenced by any observation made by this Court in this order. The parties through counsel are directed to appear before the learned Court below on 18th March, 2020. The appeal stands disposed of in above terms, so also pending miscellaneous applications, if any.