1988 PLP 629 (CLC)

Chaudhry Muhammad Afzal Taj for Appellants M.M. Saeed Beg for Respondents. Date of hearing: 16th November, 1987. ABAID ULLAH KHAN, J.‑‑This appeal against the judgment of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Sialkot, dated the 11th June, 1983, partially accepting the reference made by the late Bashir Ahmad, husband of appellant 2, and father of appellants 1, 3 to 7, for enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded by the Collector for acquisition of his land, arises out of the following circumstances. The Provincial Government acquired 75 Kanals 19 Marlas of land entered in khasras Nos. 2418, 2419, 2433 to 2436, 2438 to 2444, situate in the area of Narowal estate, Tehsil Narowal, District Sialkot, for the purpose of construction of Wing Headquarters of Chenab Rangers. Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, was published in the official Gazette on the 30th December, 1974. The owners of the land put forth before the Land Acquisition Collector the demand of compensation at the rate of Rs.90,000 per Kanal. The Land Acquisition Collector announced his award on the 2nd January, 1980, giving compensation at the rate of Rs.3,040 per Kanal and Rs.13,050 in respect of the house belonging to Mst. Ghulam Fatima, one of the owners of the land.

2. Bashir Ahmad deceased, the predecessor‑in‑interest of the appellants, who owned 6 Marlas of land (forming part of the land bearing Khasra No, 2439) and the house standing thereon, did not accept the award and moved the Collector requiring the matter to be referred to the Court for determining the true amount of compensation. He averred that he had purchased the aforesaid 6 Marlas of land from one Ali Russain for Rs.1,200 on the 13th February, 1974, by means of a registered sale‑deed. He alleged that he had incurred expenditure of Rs.10,000 on building the house. He asked for increase in the quantum of compensation.

3. The respondents contested Bashir Ahmad's claim and maintained that the compensation assessed in the award was adequate.

4. The learned Senior Civil Judge banked upon the price (Rs.1,200) paid by Bashir Ahmad when he had purchased the land on the 13th February, 1974, to fix the market value of the land in question because he was of the view that there had been no appreciable change in the price when notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published on the 30th December, 1974. He accepted the statement of Mst. Asghari Bibi, widow of Bashir Ahmad, appellant 2, A.W. 2, that Rs.650 had been spent on the construction of the house for compensating the appellants for the acquisition of the house. They were held entitled to receive Rs.7,700 plus Rs.1,155 as compulsory acquisition charges of fifteen per centum thereof, in all they were to get Rs.8,885.

5. The grievance of the learned counsel for the appellants that the learned Senior Civil Judge did not take into consideration the report of the Commissioner, Muhammad Siddiq Shah, Sub‑Engineer, Municipal Committee, Narowal, A.W. 1, is not well founded. The Commissioner prepared the report without notice to the respondents and the report has been drawn up in a perfunctory manner. He does not state any reason for what has been stated therein. The figures in the report seem to have been arbitrarily entered. It did not deserve any consideration.

6. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellants that since the amount of compensation awarded by the Collector had not been paid or deposited on or before taking possession of the land, the appellants had the right to get compound interest at the rate of eight per cent per annum from the time of taking possession till the payment or deposit of the said amount of compensation could not be disputed by the learned counsel for the respondents. It is true that the amount of compensation assessed by the Collector in the award was not paid or deposited on or before the Government took over possession of the land. This renders the Government liable to pay compound interest at the rate of eight per cent per annum from the date of taking over possession till the payment or deposit of the amount of compensation as envisaged by section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act.

7. In view of the above this appeal is partially accepted with costs and the judgment under appeal is modified to the extent that the appellant will recover compound interest at the rate of eight per cent per annum on the amount of compensation assessed by the Collector from the time of taking over possession of the land till the payment or deposit of the aforementioned amount. M. Y. H. /S‑148/L Appeal partly accepted