On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the purported agreement to sell was executed on 20.1.1990, whereas much prior to the said agreement to sell, Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘the Act of 1894’) was issued on 9.7.1987 and Notification under Section 6 was issued on 30.8.1988. Since no objections were filed, land in question was acquired by UIT, Bharatpur and award was passed on 28.7.1990. The said award dated 28.7.1990 was challenged by some persons by filing writ petitions (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5434/1990, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1839/1991 and other connected cases) before this Court, which were allowed vide order dated 8.12.1993. Thereafter D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 164/1994 came to be filed by UIT, Bharatpur challenging the order dated 8.12.1993 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, which was allowed vide judgment dated 18.4.1996 and the order dated 8.12.1993 passed by the learned Single Judge was reversed and set-aside and resultantly the writ petitions were rejected. Thereafter, possession of the land in question was taken over on 13.8.1996, land was vested in UIT, Bharatpur and compensation was paid on 10.8.1998. It was further submitted that on the basis of purported agreement to sell dated 20.1.1990, the suit was filed on 7.2.1999, which was time barred, but without its decision on merits, a collusive decree was obtained on the basis of compromise. It was further submitted that the land in question was ancestral property and the applicants were also having their share in the land in
