ORDER : 1. Petitioners in the year 2021 seek to set aside an award passed by National Lok Adalat on 09.12.2017, on the ground that they had not authorized the learned counsel, who had appeared on their behalf before the Lok Adalat. 2...... (i) A bunch of regular first appeals was listed before the National Lok Adalat on 09.12.2017. This bunch included R.F.A. No. 168 of 2015 with C.O. No. 126 of 2016 titled the Land Acquisition Collector vs. Roshal Lal alongwith other connected regular first appeals. (ii) The bunch matters alongwith R.F.A. No. 168 of 2015 and C.O. No. 126/2016 was taken up by the National Lok Adalat. Shri Purinder Sharma, Joint Director, Prosecution (PWD) cum Member Secretary (Litigation) Monitoring, appeared on behalf of the appellants. His statement recorded by the Lok Adalat on 09.12.2017 was as under:- “Stated that I have been authorized by the State of Himachal Pradesh-Appellants to withdraw the present appeals in the interest of general public. The appeals are accordingly dismissed as withdrawn as the award passed by the learned District Judge is within the permissible limit. Court fee be refunded to the appellants strictly in accordance with law. The award be passed accordingly. The awarded amount, if not be deposited will be deposited in a month.” Shri Surinder Verma, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the respondents/cross-objectors (present petitioners). His statement was recorded on oath as under:- “I have heard and understood the statement given by Shri Purinder Sharma, Joint Director, Prosecution (PWD)-cum Member Secretary (Litigation) Monitoring, Nirman Bhawan, Shimla, H.P. and the same is correct. As per the instruction given by my clients, the present appeals filed by the State may kindly be dismissed as withdrawn and similarly Cross-Objections filed by respondents in some of the case also stand dismissed as withdrawn. I am giving aforesaid statement on behalf of my clients.” (iii) Lok Adalat thereafter proceeded to pass following award on 09.12.2017:- “1. Shri Purinder Sharma, Joint Director, Prosecution (PWD)-cum-Member Secretary (Litigation) Monitoring alongwith Shri Vidya Sagar Sharma, Assistant Engineer, SNP Shahnahar Project, Sub Division Thakurdwara under Division SNP Sansarpur Terrace appeared before us and submitted vide separate statement that the present appeals be dismissed as withdrawn as the award passed by the learned District Judge is within the permissible limit and State has no objection if the appeals be dismissed withdrawn. 2. 2. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted the Cross-Objections filed by the respondents be also dismissed as withdrawn and he has no objection if the present Cross-Objections is dismissed as withdrawn. Statements of parties have been recorded separately and placed on record. 3. In view of the above submissions, the present appeals and Cross-Objections are dismissed as withdrawn. Statements of the parties will form part and parcel of the award. The amount awarded by the learned District Judge will be deposited by the appellants if already not deposited, within a month in the Registry of High Court of Himachal Pradesh and the same shall be released in favour of the respondents alongwith up-to-date interest in the Payee Account Numbers to be furnished by the respondents within fortnight. The Court fee shall be refunded in favour of the appellants strictly as per rules. The award is passed accordingly and the appeals alongwith applications, if any, and Cross-Objections stand disposed of. (Anand Sharma) (D.K. Khenal) (P.S. Rana) Member Member Chairman.” (iv) In the instant petition filed by the original respondents-cross objectors, a prayer has been made for setting aside the award dated 09.12.2017 passed by the Lok Adalat and for restoration of cross-objection No. 126/2016 to its original number and for its decision on merits by the Court. 3. Sh. H.S. Rangra, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners had not authorized Shri Surinder Verma, Advocate, to appear and make statement on their behalf before the Lok Adalat on 09.12.2017. The authorized counsel in the R.F.A. No. 168/2015 and its connected cross-objection was Sh. H.S. Rangra, Advocate (counsel in the present petition). Neither Sh. H.S. Rangra, Advocate, nor the present petitioners had authorized Sh. Surinder Verma, Advocate, to appear and make statement on their behalf before the Lok Adalat in the case in question. It is also contended that the present petitioners were under the bonafide impression that only the appeal filed by the appellants i.e. the Land Acquisition Collector, was dismissed as withdrawn under the award dated 09.12.2017 and that their cross-objection was still pending. It was only on 08.04.2021, when the record of the case was inspected by Sh. H.S Rangra, Advocate, that he became aware of the fact that not only the appeal but the cross-objection preferred by the present petitioners had also been dismissed by the Lok Adalat as withdrawn. It was only on 08.04.2021, when the record of the case was inspected by Sh. H.S Rangra, Advocate, that he became aware of the fact that not only the appeal but the cross-objection preferred by the present petitioners had also been dismissed by the Lok Adalat as withdrawn. On the basis of these assertions, prayer has been made for setting aside the award dated 09.12.2017 to the extent it dismissed as withdrawn the cross-objection filed by the present petitioners (original respondents in R.F.A. No. 168/2015). Learned Deputy Advocate General defended the award and submitted that the present petitioners (original respondents) had engaged different learned counsels in different proceedings. She further submitted that it is incorrect on part of the petitioners to submit that they had not authorized Shri Surinder Verma, Advocate, to make statement on their behalf before the Lok Adalat. 4. Certain facts become relevant in order to appreciate the grievance projected by the petitioners: (i) The award was passed by the Lok Adalat on 09.12.2017 whereby not only the appeal but the cross-objection was also dismissed as withdrawn. The award was passed on the strength of statement made by the representative appearing on behalf of the appellants as well as on the basis of statement made by Shri Surinder Verma, Advocate, on behalf of the present petitioners. Learned counsel for the present petitioners contended that Sh. Surinder Verma, Advocate, was not authorized to appear and make statement on behalf of the present petitioners in the Lok Adalat. Be that as it may. (ii) Significantly, subsequent to the award, present petitioners moved C.M.P. No. 697/2020 in R.F.A. No. 168/2015 under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The prayer in the application was for release of the awarded amount in their favour. In this application, averments were made by the petitioners that the appeal had been finally disposed of vide order dated 09.12.2017 and that they are in the need of money. Therefore, prayer was made for release of the awarded amount. Two paragraphs of the application being relevant are extracted hereinafter:- “1. That the above titled first appeal against the award passed by the learned Addl. District Judge Mandi, District Mandi has been filed by the non-applicant/appellant before the Hon’ble Court which appeal has been finally disposed of by this Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 09.12.2017. 2. Two paragraphs of the application being relevant are extracted hereinafter:- “1. That the above titled first appeal against the award passed by the learned Addl. District Judge Mandi, District Mandi has been filed by the non-applicant/appellant before the Hon’ble Court which appeal has been finally disposed of by this Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 09.12.2017. 2. That the non-applicant had preferred the appeal before this Hon’ble High Court and as per the direction of this Hon’ble Court had also deposited the entire amount of compensation in the registry of this Hon’ble Court.” The application was supported with the affidavits of the present petitioners. (iii) C.M.P. No. 697/2020 was allowed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 24.02.2020 with following order:- “By way of instant application, prayer has been made on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3 and 4(a) to 4(c) for the release of award amount lying deposited in the Registry of this Court. Learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the non-applicant/appellant fairly states that since no appeal whatsoever has been filed by them, against order dated 9.12.2017 passed by National Lok Adalat, there appears to be no impediment in accepting the prayer made in the instant application and accordingly same may be allowed. Averments contained in the application clearly reveal that the appeal having been filed by the non-applicant/appellant was finally disposed of as compromised vide order dated 9.12.2017 passed by National Lok Adalat. Since no appeal, whatsoever, has been filed against aforesaid order by either of the parties, in the Hon’ble Supreme Court, same has attained finality, as such, there appears to be no impediment in accepting the prayer made in the instant application, which is accordingly allowed. Award amount lying deposited with the Registry of this Court is ordered to be released in favour of the applicants/ respondents Nos. 1 to 3 and 4(a) and 4(c) as per their shares and remit the same into their saving bank accounts, details whereof is given in Para-5 of the application, subject to verification by the Accounts Branch. Application stands disposed of.” 5. Contents of the above extracted application and perusal of the above order would indicate that the present petitioners were very well aware of the order dated 09.12.2017 passed by the National Lok Adalat. The order dated 09.12.2017 clearly records the fact that not only the appeal but the cross-objection was also dismissed as withdrawn. Application stands disposed of.” 5. Contents of the above extracted application and perusal of the above order would indicate that the present petitioners were very well aware of the order dated 09.12.2017 passed by the National Lok Adalat. The order dated 09.12.2017 clearly records the fact that not only the appeal but the cross-objection was also dismissed as withdrawn. It was only thereafter that the application for release of the awarded amount was moved by the petitioners on the ground that the matter was finally disposed of. It cannot be the case of the present petitioners that there were two separate orders passed on 09.12.2017, one dismissing the appeal and the other dismissing their cross-objection. Therefore there is no escape from the conclusion that the petitioners were very well aware of the order dated 09.12.2017 dismissing the appeal as well as their cross-objection as withdrawn. They accordingly moved the application before the Court for release of the awarded amount after disposal of the case by the Lok Adalat on 09.12.2017. In case the present petitioners were aggrieved by the dismissal of their cross-objection then they were required to take appropriate steps in that regard at the relevant time. The moving of application by the petitioners for release of the awarded amount after being aware of the order dated 09.12.2017 clearly indicates that the petitioners had accepted and acquiesced in the award dated 09.12.2017 dismissing not only the appeal but also their cross-objection as withdrawn. They cannot be permitted to set up a plea three years later that Shri Surinder Verma, learned counsel, was not authorized by them to appear and make statement on their behalf before the Lok Adalat and that for this reason the award be set aside. The order passed by the Coordinate Bench on 24.02.2020 specifically records that “the appeal having been filed by the non-applicant/appellant was finally disposed of as compromised vide order dated 9.12.2017 passed by National Lok Adalat. Since no appeal, whatsoever, has been filed against aforesaid order by either of the parties, in the Hon’ble Supreme Court, same has attained finality, as such, there appears to be no impediment in accepting the prayer made in the instant application, which is accordingly allowed.” The order was passed in present of Sh. H.S. Rangra, Advocate, for the present petitioners. Since no appeal, whatsoever, has been filed against aforesaid order by either of the parties, in the Hon’ble Supreme Court, same has attained finality, as such, there appears to be no impediment in accepting the prayer made in the instant application, which is accordingly allowed.” The order was passed in present of Sh. H.S. Rangra, Advocate, for the present petitioners. The petitioners who were applicants in C.M.P. No. 697/2020 were released awarded amount on the basis of the statement made on their behalf that the award dated 9.12.2017 had become final. Therefore, the plea being taken now that the present petitioners were not aware of dismissal of their cross-objection as withdrawn under order dated 09.12.2017 is not borne out from the record. Having accepted the award, having acted upon it, the present petitioners are now estopped from challenging it. Hence, the instant petition being totally misconceived and devoid of merit is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.