1. ' SHABBIR AHMAD, J---The appellant aggrieved by the order dated 20-10-2003 has filed the present appeal. By the impugned order, the appellant has been directed to pay the amount under decree to the respondent No.6 within period of three months from the date of order.
2. ' The facts relevant for the present appeal are that Government issued Notification under sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act for acquisition of land required for laying of water supply line by the defunct Karachi Development Authority. The Assistant Commissioner, West was appointed Land Acquisition Officer, who initiated the acquisition proceedings and offered compensation to the affected party inclusive of the respondent No.6 in terms of Award dated 22-9-1983. The respondent No. 6 received the compensation offered by the Land Acquisition Officer under protest and asked for reference. The Land Acquisition Officer made reference to this Court, which was registered as Civil Reference No.1/1984, after trial, the compensation granted by the Land Acquisition Officer was enhanced as detailed in the decree part of the award dated 9-4-1999. The respondent No.6 filed execution application for execution of the decree. The office raised objections with regard to the existence of a decree which is pending objection. Till date the execution application has not been admitted. The respondent No.6 moved an application under section 151 in the reference and obtained a direction as stated herein above for payment by the appellant.
3. Hence the present appeal.
4. ' We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
5. The Award in terms of section 26 of the Land Acquisition Act is a decree, which is executable as Civil Court decree by the same Court, which has decided the reference, in the instant case, the High Court against the Land Acquisition Collector, who is the judgment-debtor under the decree. No doubt the appellant is successor of the defunct Karachi Development Authority on whose behest, the land was acquired for the purpose of the laying the Pipe Line but the appellant cannot be deemed to be the judgment-debtor. The invocation of the provision of section 151 for direction for payment of a decreetal amount was unwarranted, more particularly, when the execution application is pending. Therefore, the impugned order is not sustainable in law, which is set aside.
6. ' Before parting with the order, we would like to record that under section 26{2) of the Act, the award shall be a decree and the statement of the grounds of the award is judgment within the meaning of section 2, Clause (2) and Clause (9) respectively of the Code of Civil Procedure. Section 26 thereof reads as follows:--
26. Form of awards.---(1) Every award under this Part shall be in writing signed by the Judge, and shall specify the amount awarded under clause first of subsection (1) of section 23, and also the amounts (if any) respectively awarded under each of the other clauses of the same subsection together with the grounds of awarding each of the said amounts.
(2) Every such award shall be deemed to be decree and the statement of the grounds of every such award a judgment within the meaning of section 2, clause (2), and section 2, clause (9), respectively, of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
7. The execution application already filed to be dealt with by the office, in accordance with the law.
8. ' With the above observations, the appeal stands disposed of with IB no order as to costs.