J.V. Gupta, J. - (1.) THIS judgment will also dispose of F. A. O, No. 576 of 1983. Both these appeals have been filed against the same award of the arbitrator dated March 18, 1983.
(2.) THE land situated in village Baghar Tahsil Pathankot District Gurdaspur was earlier requisitioned in the year 1947 -48. It has now been acquired vide notification dated August 23, 1972 under - the Punjab Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act. On an application under Section 8 of the above -said Act, for determination of compensation of the acquired land the arbitrator Shri D. S. Dhaliwal, Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur, gave the award dated March 18. 1983, whereby he fixed the market price thereof at the rate of Rs. 700/ -psr kanal harani; Rs. 350/ - per kanal banjar and Rs. 175/ - per kanal ghair mumkin. In addition, the claimants were also found to be entitled to the solatium at the rate of 15 per cent and the interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum. Dissatisfied with the same, they have filed these two appeals. During the pendency of appeals, the claimants also moved Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 1989 -CII of 1986 in F. A. O No. 575 of 1983 under Order XLI Rule 27, Code of Civil Procedure, (hereinafter called the Code), seeking permission to produce the additional evidence by way of the award, Annexure A -1, dated April 5, 1983. Notice of that application was given to the Union of India to which reply has been filed.
(3.) THE learned Counsel for the Appellants contended that the copy of the award, Annexure A -1 may be allowed to be produced by way of the additional, evidence because, the said award was given during the pendency of the appeal and, therefore, could not be produced earlier before the arbitrator who gave the award under appeal on March 18, 1983. According to the learned Counsel, in the said award, the land situated in village Harial was acquired for the same purpose for which uniform market value was fixed at the rate of Rs. 1,000/ -per kanal. The land, in dispute, is similarly situated ; the said award was given with respect to the notification dated 28th March, 1970 whereas the land, in the present case, was acquired on August 23, 1972. Therefore, the said award was very relevant to determine the market price of the land, in dispute.;