JUDGMENT : SURESHWAR THAKUR, J. 1. The instant appeals, are, directed against the awards pronounced by the learned Reference Court, upon, Reference Petitions’ bearing numbers 101, 103, 105, 115, and number 116 of 2008, whereunder the learned Reference Court hence declined, to assess compensation, vis-à-vis, the acquired lands, of the land owners concerned. The reason assigned, by the learned Reference Court, in, declining, to make assessment of compensation, vis-à-vis, the acquired lands of the land owners, is, comprised in Paragraphs 34 to 36 of the impugned award, paragraphs whereof are extracted hereinafter: “34. Admittedly, in the revenue papers at the time of acquisition of the land, the State of Himachal Pradesh (respondent No.2) was recorded as the owner of the land. Of course, the possession of the petitioners was recorded over the acquired land as ‘Kabijan’. For this reason, the compensation was not paid to them by the Collector and is lying un-disbursed till date. After the institution of the reference petitions, the mutations were entered and attested in favour of the petitioners. They were recorded as hissedaran in place of ‘Kabijan’. Even the entry in the column of ownership was changed to ‘Shamlat Deh Hassab Hissa Malkiat Mandarza Sharja Nasab’ by deleting the name of the State of Himachal Pradesh. 35. There is no denial of the fact that the acquired land was situated in the State of Punjab prior to the formation of the State of Himachal Pradesh. As such, the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 was applicable to the area. It is not the case of the petitioners that they had raised the abadies over the Shamlat land. Even there is nothing on the record to show that the land was assessed to land revenue and the same was in cultivating possession of the petitioners not in excess of their share prior to 26th January, 1950. The land did not fall within the exemption clause of Section 2(g) of the Act ibid. 36. By coming into force of the Act of 1974, the acquired land vested in favour of the State of Himachal Pradesh free from all encumbrances. The mutations sanctioned in favour of the petitioners during the pendency of the petitions will not come to their rescue.” 2. The apt underlining therein, reveal, the factum of, the relevant mutation, for, all the reasons’ spelt therein rather gathering an aura of suspicion. The mutations sanctioned in favour of the petitioners during the pendency of the petitions will not come to their rescue.” 2. The apt underlining therein, reveal, the factum of, the relevant mutation, for, all the reasons’ spelt therein rather gathering an aura of suspicion. However, during the pendency of the instant appeals before this Court, the learned counsel for the appellants, has instituted an application, cast under the provisions of Order 41 Rule 27 readwith Sections 94, 107 and 151 of Code of Civil Procedure in RFA No. 207 of 2011, seeking the leave of the Court, to, append certain documents, carrying therein, the apt reflections qua the suit land, being described in the records apposite to the suit land, as “Shamlat Deh Hasab Mandarja Shajra Nasab”, documents whereof, are, jamabandis apposite to the suit land, and, appertains to the year 1998-99 and vis-à-vis year 2013-2014, and, mutation number 256 of 27.4.2002. If so and if the said entries, are, in consonance with tandem therewith, entries as initially made in the year 1950 (i) thereupon, the apt mandate of Section 4 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, provisions, whereof are extracted hereinafter, and, the apt mandate of clause (d) of Section 3 of the Himachal Pradesh Village Common Lands Vesting and Utilization (Amendment)Act, No.20 of 2001, provisions whereof stand extracted hereinafter, especially, the apt exclusionary benefits thereof, hence barring the vesting of lands, rather described in the apt revenue records, as Shamlat Deh, in, the Panchayat, hence being visitable upon the appellants. Consequently, the adduction(s) into evidence of the aforesaid documents primafacie appears to be both just and essential, hence for determining, the, controversy, visavis, the entitlements, of the land owners, to seek compensation vis-à-vis their lands also their adduction(s) into evidence are hence essential, for, dispelling the aura of suspicion purportedly surrounding, the, attestation of the relevant mutation, thereupon leave is granted, to tender/exhibit the aforesaid documents into evidence. Section 4 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 4. Vesting of rights in Panchayats and non-proprietors. Section 4 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 4. Vesting of rights in Panchayats and non-proprietors. (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law for the time being in force or in any agreement, instrument, custom or usage or any decree or order of any court or other authority, all rights, title and interests whatever in the land: (a) which is included in the shamilat deh of any village and which has not vested in a panchayat under the shamilat law shall, at the commencement of this Act, vest in a panchayat constituted for, such, village, and, where no such panchayat, has been constituted for such village; vest in the panchayat on such date, as a panchayat having jurisdiction over that village is constituted; (b) which is situated within or outside the abadi deh of a village and which is under the house owned by a non-proprietor, shall on the commencement of the shamilat law, be deemed to have been vested in such non-proprietor. (2) Any land which is vested in a panchayat under the shamilat law shall be deemed to have been vested in the panchayat under this Act. (3) Nothing contained in clause (a) of subsection (1)and in subsection (2) shall affect or shall' be deemed ever to have affected the- (I) existing rights, title or interest of persons who though not entered as occupancy tenants in the revenue records are accorded a similar status by custom or otherwise, such as Dholidars, Bhondedars, Butimars, Bosikhuopahus, Saunjidars, Muqararidars; (ii) rights of persons in cultivating possession of shamilat deh for more than twelve years without payment of rent or by payment of charges not exceeding the land revenue and cesses payable thereon; (iii) rights of a mortgagee to whom such land is mortgaged with possession before, the 26th January, 1950.” clause (d) of Section 3 of the Himachal Pradesh Village Common Lands Vesting and Utilization (Amendment)Act, No.20 of 2001 “(d) land records as “Shamlat tika Hasab Raad Malguzari” or by any such other name in the ownership column of jamabandi and assessed to land revenue and has been continuously recorded in cultivating possession of co-sharers so recorded before 26th January, 1950 to the extent of their shares therein.” 3. However, since the aforesaid documents, are, required to be adduced into evidence, and, exhibited only before the learned Reference Court, hence after quashing the impugned award, the matters, are, remanded to the learned Reference Court, with a direction to the learned Reference Court, to, after enabling tendering(s) and exhibition(s) thereof, and, also after opportunities being granted to the respondents, to, lead apt evidence in rebuttal, render, a decision afresh upon the land Reference Petitions No. 101,103,105,115, and, number 116 of 2008, within three months hereafter. In view of the above, the appeals stand disposed of, alongwith, all pending applications.