1990 PLP 317 (SCMR)
Mst. GHULAM FATIMA Petitioner Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB and others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1990 PLP 317 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Abdul Kadir Shaikh and Ghulam Mujaddid, JJ |
| Parties | Mst. GHULAM FATIMA Petitioner Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB and others‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Land Acquisition Act (I of 1894)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 317 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Land Acquisition Act (I of 1894)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 317 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Abdul Kadir Shaikh and Ghulam Mujaddid, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 317 (SCMR) (Mst. GHULAM FATIMA Petitioner Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Taki Ahmad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 4th July, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment/order of Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 16‑11‑1987 in R.F.A. No.135 of 1983). ‑‑‑S.23‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑‑Leave to appeal granted to consider whether the Courts below had failed to consider the potential value of the land compulsorily acquired. Fazl‑ur‑Rehman v. General Manager, S.I.D.B. PLD 1986 SC 158 rel.
Judgment & Decree
Taki Ahmad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 4th July, 1989. ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.‑‑This is a petition for leave to appeal from the judgment of Lahore High Court dated 16‑11‑1987 partly allowing petitioner's appeal, in that, in addition to compensation amount awarded by the Senior Civil Judge, Sialkot, she was allowed "15% of the amount of compensation in consideration of compulsory nature of acquisition as well as compound interest at the rate of 8% 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 aforesaid amount". Originally petitioner was awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.3,040 per kanal for her agricultural land and Rs.13,050. in respect of her house on the land as against her claim of compensation at the rate of Rs..13,000 per kanal. On reference at the instance of the petitioner learned Senior Civil Judge, Sialkot did not accept petitioners plea for higher compensation in respect of land but he awarded compensation in respect of the construction of the house at the rate of Rs.17,738.84, Rs.2,280 for the land underneath at Rs.152 per marla, Rs.950 for hand‑pump and Rs.18,000 for Guava plants and thus increased the compensation to Rs.22,768.84. On appeal, however the High Court awarded the additional amount mentioned above. Mr. Taqi Ahmad Khan, learned counsel appearing in support of the petition submits that the Courts below have failed to consider the potential value of the land compulsorily acquired and relied in this behalf on the decision of this Court in Fazl‑ur‑Rehman v. General Manager, S.I.D.B. P L D 1986 S C 158 and certain other cases of the High Court. The aforesaid point, amongst others, deserves consideration. We, therefore, grant leave to appeal and allow the petition. Security ‑‑ Rs.2,
500. Appeal will be heard on the present record but it is open to the parties to file additional documents, if any. M.A.K./G‑220/S Leave granted.