Law:

Section:

  West Pakistan Requisitioning of Immovable Property (Temporary Powers) Act(VII of 1956), S. 6-Compensation awarded under provisions of Act-Appeal against order of arbitrator can be heard by High Court Judge sitting singly inspire of the fact that value of appeal is more than Rs. 5,000-High Court Rules and Orders (Lahore) Vol. V, Ch. 3-B, r. 1 (IV).   Rule 1(IV) of Chapter 3-B, Vol. V of the Lahore High Court Rules and Orders is to the effect that a first appeal against an order passed in proceedings which are not taken under the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, shall ordinarily be heard by a Judge of the High Court sitting singly. Where an award is given by the arbitrator under the provisions of the West Pakistan Requisitioning of Immovable Property (Temporary Powers) Act, 1956, it is a case governed by this rule and, therefore, an appeal against the award of the arbitrator can be heard by a Judge of the High Court sitting singly in spite of the fact that the amount involved in the appeal is more than Rs. 5,000.   West Pakistan Requisitioning of Immovable Property (Temporary Powers) Act (VII of 1956), Ss. S & 6-Award of arbitrator in proceedings under S. 5 (3) and one under S. 6 Difference-Arbitrator appointed under S. 6 (I) (b) can give finding only with regard to compensation payable to house owner for use and occupation of house-No jurisdiction to deal with any other dispute existing between owner of house and Government.   An arbitrator appointed under the provisions of the West Pakistan Requisitioning of Immovable Property (Temporary Powers) Act, 1956, awarded to the owner of the house requisitioned under the Act, Rs. 5,584-9 out of which Rs. 5,431-2 were awarded for damage to the house belonging to the owner. In appeal against the order of the arbitrator it was contended by the Government that an arbitrator appointed under the provisions of clause (b) of subsection (1) of section 6 of the Act could give finding only with regard to compensation payable to the house-owner under section 6 of the Act and could not concern himself with any other dispute between the owner of the house and the Provincial Government. In reply it was contended…