2007 SCMR 860 (PLP)

ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, J.

These four direct appeals are being disposed of through this judgment involving identical questions of law and facts arising out of common judgment dated 10-5-2004 passed by learned Judge in Chambers of Peshawar High Court, Peshawar whereby R.F.As. Nos.61 and 62 of 1998 were partially accepted and the judgment and decree of the Referee Judge was modified to the extent that compensation amount was enhanced from Rs.652.78 per Marla to Rs.900 per Marla along with 15% compulsory acquisition charges and 6% interest.

2. Facts in brief are that land measuring 114 Kanals and 5 Marlas situated in village Maho Dheri Mardan belonging to private appellants in Civil Appeals Nos.1456 and 1457 of 2004 was acquired by Land Acquisition Collector, Mardan for Narai Drain Mardan. Vide Award No.239, dated 10-7-1991 compensation was fixed at the rate of Rs.652.78 per Marla along with 15% compulsory acquisition charges and 6% simple interest. Feeling not satisfied private appellants filed reference petition under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act before Referee Judge for enhancement of compensation which was dismissed on 2-6-1998. This judgment was challenged by both parties through R.F.As. Nos.61 and 62 of 1998 respectively before learned Peshawar High Court, Peshawar which were partially allowed as stated above vide impugned judgment.

3. We have heard Messrs Jan Muhammad Khan, learned counsel for the appellants in Civil Appeals Nos.1456 and 1457 of 2004 and Abdul Qadar Khattak, learned counsel for the appellants in Civil Appeals Nos.2025 and 2026 of 2004 at length and have gone through the record and proceedings of the case in minute particulars.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants in Civil Appeals Nos.1456 and 1457 of 2004 vehemently contended that learned Judge in Chambers of High Court has not followed the settled law and drawn incorrect conclusion about the rate of compensation in the impugned judgment. He further contended that the owners of the land should be compensated adequately according to the market value. He contended that the price of Shah Nehri is too high but unfortunately its price has been assessed on the basis of the Banjar Qadeem land and the learned High Court has failed to make a distinction between Banjar Qadeem land and Shah Nehri Land. According to him the acquired land is situated at the bank of the road near to Abadi and commercial in nature thus, looking to its potential value the compensation be enhanced to Rs.4,000 per Marla with necessary charges.

5. On the other hand learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellants in Civil Appeals Nos.2025 and 2026 of 2004 contended that judgment and decree of the learned Referee Judge was in accordance with the material brought on record and the learned Judge in Chambers of the High Court enhanced the compensation without any factual or legal justification and the same is based on surmises. No cogent reasons have been advanced for the same, as such impugned judgment being untenable be set aside and that of the learned Referee Judge be restored.

6. Though private appellants from the time of acquisition of their land had been demanding compensation at the rate of Rs.4,000 per Marla as according to them their land is situated at the bank of the main road near to Abadi and is commercial in nature thus its potential value would be much higher. On this aspect of the matter learned counsel appearing on behalf of Land Acquisition Collector could not shatter the stance of private appellants though cross-examined at length, therefore, learned High Court was right in concluding that acquired land was situated near road surrounded by Abadi and also being commercial had sufficient potential value. The determination of potential value of the land on the basis of Aust Yaksala is not sufficiently rebutted hence the stance is also without any substance. In our opinion the impugned judgment does not require interference as learned High Court has rightly enhanced the rate of compensation after taking into consideration the market/potential value and evidence adduced by both parties before learned Referee Judge. Accordingly, all the appeals being devoid of any merit are dismissed with no order as to costs. M.H./A-14/SC Appeal dismissed.