JUDGMENT :

N.V. RAMANA, J.

1. When the matter came up last time, on 03.02.2021, this Court passed the following order:

“In spite of service, no one has appeared on behalf of the respondents.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants.

Taking into consideration the nonappearance of the counsel for the respondents and to know the exact position of the disputed property as well as whether any compromise has taken place between the parties, we grant two weeks to the counsel for the appellants to do the needful.

List the matter immediately after two weeks.”

2. Even today, when the matter was called out, nobody appeared for the respondents in spite of service of notice.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants.

4. In response to our earlier query, it is represented by the learned counsel for the appellants that no settlement has taken place between the parties, and according to her the parties intend to continue with the litigation.

5. Taking into account the long pendency of the present appeal before this Court, and the fact that, despite service of notice, the respondents have not entered appearance from the very beginning as per the Office Reports, we are of the opinion that we