' KHILJI ARIF HUSSAIN, J.---This direct appeal has been filed by the Mst. Sumaira Gul-appellant against the judgment dated 9-10-2002, passed by the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar in R.F.A.
No,71 of 2001, whereby the learned High Court modified the judgment and decree of referee Judge by enhancing cost of 33 Kanals, 10 Marlas of acquired land from Rs, 4,300 per malra to Rs,8000 per marla along with 15% compulsory acquisition charges and usual interest.
2. Brief facts to decide the case are that on the request of WAPDA, Notification dated 7-10-1996 under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for 55 Kanals, 1 Marla of land was issued by the Land Acquisition Collector. The Collector concerned asked the department as per requirement of the provisions of the Act to place the funds/tentative compensation amount at the disposal of the Collector but the acquiring department due to the alleged financial constraints could not comply till November; 1999. On the request of acquiring department to acquire the area of 33 kanals, 10 marlas instead of 55 kanals, 01 marla. The Collector after necessary codal formalities and the other required notifications in the sequence having been issued; thereafter announced the Award No,52/LACP on 17-12-1999, wherein he fixed the compensation at the rate of Rs,4300 per marla besides the compulsory acquisition charges and also allowed compensation for the standing trees/crops.
3. The appellant aggrieved by the award filed objection petition under section 18 of the land Acquisition Act, 1894 against the said award. The learned Senior Civil Judge, of referee Court, after framing the issues and recording the evidence of the parties dismissed the objection petition vide his judgment dated 20-9-2001. The appellant impugned the said order before the High Court, by filing R.F.A. No,71 of 2001, under section 54 of the Act, which was modified vide its judgment dated 9- 10-2002, which order has been impugned through this direct appeal.
4. We have heard Mr. Abdul Sattar Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for the appellant and S. Arshad Hussain Shahi Additional Advocate-General for the respondent.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant half-heartedly argued that the market value of the land was Rs,10,000 per marla but learned High Court has directed the same as Rs,8,000 per marla. The learned Advocate further argued that learned High Court committed error of law in awarding compensation at the rate of 15% per annum instead of 25% per annum on the market value of the land acquired as required under section 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act. In support of his contentions he relied upon definition of 'Company' given in section 3(e) of the Act.
6. Learned counsel for the respondents in reply, argued that the compulsory acquisition charges at the rate of 25% was not claimed before the appellate Court and as such the appellant cannot claim the same at this stage before this Court.
7. We have taken into consideration respective arguments of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. From perusal of the record, it appears that the land in question was acquired on the request of WAPDA to establish 132 KV Grid Station on it. The WAPDA was constituted by an Act of the Parliament. Section 3 of the Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority, Act (XXXI of 1958) reads as under:-- "3. Constitution of the Authority:
(1) There shall be established an Authority to be known as the (Pakistan) Water and Power Development Authority for carrying out the purposes of this Act.
(2) The Authority shall be a body corporate, shall be entitled to acquire and hold property, shall have perpetual succession and a common seal and shall by the said name sue and be sued."
8. From the reading of section, 3 of the WAPDA Act 1958 along with definition of the company given in Companies Ordinance 1984/Act 1913, it appears that the legislature by special law of Land Acquisition Act, defines "Company" for the purpose of Act for providing compensation to a person whose land has been acquired by the Federal or Provincial Government or by a Company incorporated by an Act of the Parliament or by any an Indian Law or by Royal Charter or Letter Patent and includes a Societies Registration Act, 1860, different than the "Company" defines by the Company's Ordinance 1984.
9. The WAPDA being an Authority established by an Act of the Parliament being a body corporate is a Company within the meaning of Company as defined by section 3(e) of Act.
10. Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act has laid down that in addition to market value of the land awarded, a sum of 15% as Compulsory Acquisition charges is to be awarded, if Federal' or Provincial Government acquires the land for public purpose and a sum of 25% on such market value as compulsory acquisition charges if acquisition has been made for a company. Since admittedly Land in question has been acquired for a company in terms of section 3(e) of the Act, the appellant was entitled for compulsory acquisition charges, in addition to market value of the land at the rate of 25% and not at the rate of 15% as awarded by the High Court.
11. As regard the market value of the land in question is concerned, the learned High Court after taken into consideration all necessary aspects of the matter rightly come to the conclusion that an amount of Rs'.8000 per marla as compensation would be reasonable market valuable for the land in question.
12. In view of the above discussion, we accordingly partly allow this appeal to the extent that the appellant is entitled for the compensation at the rate of 25% on the market value of the land as determined by the High Court.