2026 PLP 688 (CLC)

KHWAJA MUHAMMAD NASIM, J.

The captioned appeal by leave of the Court has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 23.05.2024, passed by the High Court in Civil Appeal No. 280/2019.

2. The precise facts forming the background of the captioned appeal are that vide award No.06/2014, dated 27.11.2014, the land comprising khewat No.06, survey No.61, measuring 1 kanal, 11 marla, owned by the respondents, herein, situated at village Dunnroli, Tehsil Pattika/Naseerabad, was acquired by the Collector Land Acquisition (hereinafter to be referred as Collector), for construction of the Jheng Hydro Power Project. The compensation of the acquired land was assessed at the rate of Rs.1,20,000/- per kanal, besides 15% compulsory acquisition charges by the Collector. Feeling dissatisfied from the amount of the compensation assessed by the Collector, the landowners filed a reference application before the Additional District Judge/Reference Judge, Pattika/Naseerabad, for enhancement of the amount of compensation while claiming therein, that the value of the acquired land is not less than Rs.20,00,000/- per kanal, whereas, the Collector has assessed an inadequate amount of compensation as Rs. 1,20,000/- per kanal. It was claimed that the Collector has determined the value of the acquired land arbitrarily without having regard to the commercial and potential value of the same. It was also stated that the compensation has not been determined keeping in view the factors enumerated in section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The reference was contested by the appellants, herein, whereby, the claim of the landowners was refuted in toto. In the light of the pleadings of the parties, the learned Reference Judge framed issues and the parties were directed to lead evidence pro and contra. At the conclusion of the proceedings, the learned Reference Judge, vide judgment and decree dated 24.06.2019, accepted the reference application and enhanced the amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- per marla, besides 15% compulsory acquisition charges. The appellants/acquiring agency, being dissatisfied from the judgment passed by the Reference Judge, filed an appeal before the High Court. After necessary proceedings, the learned I-ugh Court through the impugned judgment has dismissed the appeal, hence, this appeal by leave of the Court.

3. Ch. Aslam Raza, the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants, submitted that the impugned judgments and decrees passed by the Courts below are against law and the record of the case, which are not sustainable in the eye of law. He further submitted that the landowners in support of their claim adduced the oral as well as the documentary evidence but failed to prove that the compensation of the acquired land is more than the compensation assessed by the Collector. He further submitted that the learned Reference Judge also discarded the documentary evidence adduced by the landowners being executed in the adjacent village and pertaining to the small portions of land, but in spite of that enhanced the compensation while relying upon the report of the Commission. The learned Advocate referred to a copy of the judgment of this Court titled "Azad Government and others v. Ali Akbar and others" (Civil PLA No.265/2020, decided on 20.01.2022) and submitted that the same award was previously challenged by the other landowners i.e. "Akbar Ali and others" whereby the same amount of compensation was determined by the Collector. Upon reference application, the learned Reference Judge enhanced the compensation amount from Rs.1,20,000/- to Rs.2,00,000/- per kanal, and the judgment of the Reference Judge was endorsed up to this Court, whereas, in the instant case, the learned Reference Judge has enhanced the compensation amount from Rs.1,20,000/- per kanal to Rs.20,00,000/- per kanal, without any cogent and strong oral as well as the documentary evidence. The learned High Court while handing down the impugned judgment has overlooked this important aspect of the case, hence, the interference by this Court to rectify the illegality committed by the Courts below is warranted under law. Lastly, the learned Advocate, prayed for acceptance of appeal.

4. Conversely, Raja Arshad Khan, the learned Advocate representing the respondents/landowners argued that admittedly the land in question is situated adjacent to Leswa Bypass Road, thus, it is proved from the record that the land in question is of commercial nature and has the potential value to be put in future, hence, the learned Reference Judge has rightly enhanced the compensation amount in view of the potential value of the land. He defended the impugned judgment and stated that the same is perfect and legal. In support of his submissions, the learned Advocate referred to and relied upon the case law reported as "Secretary Education and 2 others v. Muhammad Hafeez" (2021 SCR 414) and submitted that the potential value of the land has also to be considered while determining the compensation amount, and the land of the respondents has a higher potential value, therefore, the learned Reference Judge has rightly enhanced the compensation. He prayed for dismissal of the appeal.

5. We have considered the arguments advanced by the learned Advocates representing the parties and examined the record of the case made available along with the impugned judgment. A perusal of the record reveals that the land owned by the respondents, herein, was acquired for construction of Jheng Hydro Power Project, Tehsil Pattika/Naseerabad, vide award No.06/2014, dated 27.11.2014. The compensation of the acquired land was assessed at the rate of Rs.1,20,000/- per kanal, besides 15% compulsory acquisition charges by the Collector. Feeling dissatisfied from the amount of the compensation assessed by the Collector, the landowners filed a reference application before the Additional District/Reference Judge Pattika/Naseerabad, for enhancement of the amount of compensation. The learned Reference Judge accepted the reference application and enhanced the amount of compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000/- per marla, besides 15% compulsory acquisition charges, vide judgment and decree dated 24.06.2019. Through the impugned judgment the learned High Court has upheld the judgment and decree passed by the learned Reference Judge.

6. It is revealed from the record that the landowners, in support of their claim for enhancement of the compensation, produced the oral as well as documentary evidence. In documentary evidence the landowners produced the sale-deeds pertaining to the adjacent village, i.e Balgran, however, the learned Reference Judge discarded the said documentary evidence and enhanced the compensation of the land in question as Rs.1,00,000/- per marla, while relying upon the report of the Commission, wherein it is stated that the land in question is situated adjacent to Leswa Bypass Road and there exist also some shops. In our considered view, the learned Reference Judge was not justified to enhance the compensation while merely relying upon the report of the Commission, because previously the same award was challenged before the learned Reference Judge, Pattika/Naseerabad, by the other landowners i.e. "Akbar Ali and others", wherein the Collector assessed the compensation as Rs. 1,20,000/- per kanal. However, upon reference application, the compensation amount was enhanced from Rs.1,20,000/- to Rs.2,00,000/- per kanal. The said judgment of the Reference Judge was upheld up to this Court in the case titled "Azad Government and others v. Akbar Ali and others" (Civil PLA No.265/2020, decided on 20.01.2020). In the present case, upon careful examination of the record, it is evident that the land in question is situated in a hilly area and has been utilized for the purpose of installing the water pipe for the Hydro Power Project. This fact clearly indicates that the acquired land is not flat, but rather hilly in nature. Furthermore, the landowners have failed to present any documentary evidence to substantiate their claim that the market value of the land is Rs.1,00,000/- per marla. The mere report of the Commission, which states that the land is situated adjacent to the Leswa Bypass Road and there exists some shops, cannot serve as the sole basis for the Reference Judge to fix the compensation as Rs.1,00,000/- per marla. Particularly, when, in the same award, the compensation for the land acquired in the adjacent village has been determined by this Court as Rs.2,00,000/- per kanal. Upon comparing the nature of the land in question with the land in the adjacent village, for which compensation has already been finalized by this Court as Rs.2,00,000/- per kanal, it becomes evident that the learned Reference Judge erred in enhancing the compensation beyond this amount. The learned Reference Judge failed to take into account several crucial factors that are relevant to the determination of fair compensation. It is a settled principle of law that while determining the compensation of the acquired land, the existence of the land within the municipal limits, its proximity to the main city, and its accessibility to essential infrastructure, have also to be taken into account. In the instant case, it is proved from the record that the acquired and is situated at a far-flung area, the nature of which is also hilly, hence, the learned Reference Judge was not justified to fix the compensation of the same as Rs.1,00,000/- per marla. The learned High Court, while handing down the impugned judgment, has failed to consider this crucial aspect of the case, thereby overlooking a material point that ought to have been factored into the determination of compensation, hence, the same is not sustainable. The case law cited by the learned counsel for the respondents/landowners, in support of their claim, is based on facts and circumstances that are distinguishable from the present case and, therefore, not applicable in the case in hand.

7. In view of the above, while accepting this appeal, the impugned judgment passed by the learned High Court dated 23.05.2024, is hereby set aside. Consequently, the judgment and decree passed by the learned Reference Judge is hereby modified and the landowners are declared entitled to the compensation as Rs.2,00,000/- per kanal, along with 15% compulsory acquisition charges. This appeal is accepted in the above terms. SA/54/SC/AJ&K Appeal allowed.