' SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, J.--- Niaz Muhammad son of Baz Muhammad and four others have filed this appeal after leave of the Court against the judgment, dated 15-4-1997 of a learned Division Bench of Balochistan High Court whereby their civil revision had been dismissed.
2. Admitted background of the case is that a land measuring 203 acres, 3 rods and 38 poles owned by the appellants was acquired by the Land Acquisition Collector Quetta, for Water and Sanitation Authority (WASA) through an award dated 26-11-1990. After enhancement of compensation by the Courts concerned and during execution proceedings, the amount of compensation was paid on 28-12-1995 and so the execution got filed as satisfied.
3. During execution proceedings and on 31-5-1995 the land owners/decree-holders filed an application that the interest due on the amount of compensation be also granted to them under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act. The Executing Court on 24-4-1996 dismissed the application on the ground that the amount in dispute not being a part of the decree could not be granted by the Executing Court that could not travel behind the decree.
4. The landowners, thereafter, filed an application before the trial/referee Court (District Judge, Quetta) under section 152, C.P.C. For the amendment of decree initially passed on 2-10-1991. The learned District Judge also declined the relief on the ground, inter alia, that the amount was not claimed in the objection petition and as the failure to grant such relief was neither a result of any clerical or arithmetical' mistake nor an accidental slip or omission, it could not be corrected under section 152 of the C.P.C. The revision petition against such finding was also dismissed by the learned High Court through the impugned order.
5. Before resorting to the real point in controversy, it would be convenient to reproduce section 28 as well as section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act in their original as well as amended form because those would be mainly relevant:-- "28. Collector may be directed to pay interest on excess compensation. If the sum which, in the opinion of the Court, the Collector ought to have awarded as compensation is in excess of the sum which the Collector did award as compensation, the award of the Court may direct that the Collector shall pay interest on such excess at the rate of six per centum per annum [increased to 8 per centum compound interest through Land Acquisition (West Pakistan Amendment) Act, 1969] from the date on which he took possession of the land to the date of payment of such excess into Court."
' Substituted section 28 after amendment through Land Acquisition (Balochistan Amendment) Act (XIII of 1985:-- "28. Additional compensation.--- In addition to the compensation fixed on the basis of market value as prevailing on the date of notification under section 4 an additional amount of fifteen per cent., per annum of the compensation so fixed shall be paid from the date of the notification under section 4 to the date of payment of compensation."
"34. Payment of interest.--- When the amount of such compensation is not paid or deposited on or before taking possession of the land, the Collector shall pay the amount awarded with interest thereon at the rate of six per centum per annum [increased to 8 per centum compound interest through Land Acquisition (West Pakistan Amendment) Act, 1969] from the time of so taking possession until it shall have been so paid or deposited."
' Through the aforesaid Balochistan Amendment, operative with effect from 6-11-1985, not only section 28, was substituted for Balochistan but another section 34, was altogether omitted. In the instant case from Balochistan, notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act having been issued in the year 1990 and the award having been announced on 26-11-1990, the substituted section 28 shall be fully applicable.
6. Even a fleeting glance over the sections above would show that the Balochistan amendment has brought a few drastic changes, like;
(a) Firstly, in original section 28 the direction to the Collector about payment of interest on excess compensation was discretionary while in the substituted section, the grant of additional amount of 15 per cent. Is mandatory.
(b) Involvement of Court/Referee Court is apparent in the original section which stands omitted in the substituted one.
(c) In the original section the amount is described as interest on B excess compensation while in the substituted section it is described as additional compensation.
(d) In the original section the interest at the specified rate was to be given on the excess amount i,e, the enhanced amount awarded by the Court (which the. Collector ought to have awarded but was not awarded) while, in the substituted section even without the intervention of or directions by the Court, the Collector himself has to award compensation at the rate of 15 per cent. Per annum on the amount fixed by the Collector on the basis of market value prevailing on the date of notification under section 4 of the Act.
7. The aforesaid differences, inter alia, between the original and substituted section 28 for Balochistan would clearly indicate that the intervention of Court is not at all necessary for the grant of the additional compensation in question. This "additional compensation" is a compensation in addition to the actual compensation not to be equated with interest and is bound to be granted by the Collector himself with effect from the date of notification under section 4 of the Act to the date of payment of compensation determined with reference to the market value prevailing at the time of such notification. Thus, a claimant is entitled to as of right and not as a bounty or favor. The purpose of such substitution is obvious because after the issuance of notification under section 4 of the Act, the Collectors used to abnormally delay the announcement of award and even thereafter never expedited the payment of compensation awarded. In order to Check this delay section 28 was enacted.
8. The second important object of substitution is to the effect that in the original section the specified interest was to be levied on the enhanced compensation allowed by the Court whereas the additional amount with specified percentage in the substituted section is to be awarded on the amount of compensation fixed by the Collector in the award with reference to the market value prevailing at the time of notification under section 4 of the Act.
9. The above discussion leads us to undoubtedly hold that under the substituted law in Balochistan the amount so fixed is to be compulsorily fixed and paid by the Collector from the date of notification under section 4 of the Act to the date of payment of compensation, while, in the original section specified interest was to be paid on the excess amount awarded by the Court. The main purpose is to check delayed payment by the Collector who, in turn, is supposed to make payment at the earliest of at least the amount awarded by himself. This is the right of the claimant whether or not claimed in so many words before any forum. It is, therefore, unjustified to hold, as held by the forums below that the amount could not be granted because it was not claimed at some relevant stage.
10. In order to check the laxity on part of the Collector in making payment of the compensation amount, the Legislature had provided another check in the shape of section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act already reproduced above. In that section the Collector was made bound to pay the amount of compensation with interest from the time of taking possession to the time of payment or deposit. As substituted section 28 in Balochistan aimed at fully serving the object of section 34, the latter section was altogether omitted through the same Amending Act XIII of 1985 whereby section 28 was substituted. This also indicates that regardless of any claim made at any stage before any forum, an owner is entitled to such compensation as of right.
11. The next question that falls for determination is as to whether the above amount could be granted under section 152, C.P.C. A perusal of the section would indicate that it could not, but at the same time, in order to do complete justice, the Courts could have granted the same under section 151, C.P.C. So far as, this Court is concerned, it can invoke the provisions of Article 187 of the Constitution in addition to section 151, C. P. C.
12. Consequently, the appeal is accepted, the impugned judgment, dated 15-4-1997 of High Court of Balochistan is set aside and the Collector is directed to make payment of additional compensation at the rate of 15 per cent. Per annum on the amount of compensation fixed by himself in the award dated 26-11-1990 from the date of notification under section 4 of the Act to the date of final payment thereof.