1. LAL JAN KHATTAK J.--- This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 23-5-2012 of the learned Judge Land Acquisition, D.I. Khan whereby reference petition of the respondents under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was accepted and the compensation amount fixed by the Land Acquisition Collector for the acquired land of the respondents-landowners was enhanced from Rs.5746.74 per kanal to Rs.28,000/- per kanal.
2. 2.Short facts of the case are that landed property of the respondents was acquired by the appellants for the construction of flood carrier drain CRBC Stage-II, D.I. Khan through Award No.48 announced on 18-11-2002. The awarded rates of Rs.5746/74 per kanal were not acceptable to the landowners who filed objection petition under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for enhancement of the compensation amount for their acquired land. After recording pro and contra evidence as produced by the parties, the learned trial Court appointed a local commission for spot inspection. The local commission visited the spot and submitted its report whereafter the learned trial Court heard counsel for the partiesandvideitsjudgmentanddecreedated23-5-2012 enhanced the compensation amount as mentioned above. The appellants are aggrieved of the said judgment and decree which they have impugned through the instant appeal.
3. 3.Learned counsel for the appellants argued that findings of the learned trial Court on Issues Nos.2, 4 and 5 are quite contrary to the record of the case; that commission report is based on some selected mutations; that the site plan prepared by the local commission is totally un-matched with the ground realities; that the report of the local commission is based on findings given in another Award No.121 dated 29-5-2004 which findings were later on reversed in appeal; that the market value of the acquired land as determined by the Land Acquisition Collector was in accordance with law; that in all the one year averages produced by the Patwari Halqa the market value of the acquired land is not more than Rs.10,000/- per kanal. The learned counsel for the appellant lastly argued that the learned trial Court has awarded 8% simple interest which is totally illegal and unsustainable.
4. 4.As against the above, learned counsel for the respondents contended that the judgment and decree of the learned trial Court is in accordance with law; that the local commission has correctly determined the market value of the acquired land; that the acquired land has the potential to fetch the market value as is determined by the local commission; that the value as determined by the Land Acquisition Collector was very meagre which has rightly been enhanced by the learned referee court.
5. 5.I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
6. 6.Perusal of the record shows that notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 18-2-1997 and the revenue agency was approached by the Collector Land Acquisition to provide one year average i.e. one year price to be based on sales through mutations executed in the village Babar prior to the date of publication under section 4 of the Act ibid. The concerned revenue agency provided one year average accordingly which value of the acquired land was worked out as Rs.5746.74 per kanal which was so fixed through the impugned award.
7. 7.It has been held umpteen times by the superior courts that while fixing or determining market value of the acquired land mere reliance should not be placed on one year average but there are other factors and considerations which being relevant must be taken into account for ascertaining the correct market value of an acquired land. In determining market value of an acquired land the Court can rely on instances of sale made shortly before and after the notification under section 4 of Act ibid. The Court may also look the inordinate delay caused in between the issuance of notification under section 4 and announcement of case award, the inflationary trend in the currency, the price hike in real estate, location of the acquired land and the loss by reason of severing of the acquired land from rest of the land of the land owners and also the damaging effect of the acquisition.
8. 8.On the touchstone of the above if we look at the acquired land the emerging scenario is that the acquired land is located near village Babar where near to it is Government Girls College, Mosque, residential houses, mettled link road connecting the village to Indus Highway (N.55), there is school for boys, electricity facilities etc. Apart from the above, land of the land owners has been divided into two parts and also one part has been damaged by the construction of drain of the appellants.
9. 9.The local commission appointed by the learned trial Court visited the spot. The commission interviewed local people and enquired from them market value of the acquired land. He checked sale mutations executed in the village in between a period of issuance of notification of section 4 and the date of announcement of Award whereafter he came to a conclusion that the correct and objective market value of the acquired land would be Rs.28000/- per kanal.
10. 10.After taking into consideration all the relevant and material factors of the case, the learned trial Court formed an opinion that the awarded rates as fixed by the case award cannot be termed as correct market value of the acquired land. The learned trial Court rightly enhanced the awarded rates from Rs.5746/- to Rs.28000/- per kanal. The judgment of the learned referee Court is based on correct appreciation of case evidence and law on the subject. The judgment and decree impugned by the appellant is maintained and resultantly the appeal is dismissed with a modification that the award of interest Rs.8% simple interest is reduced to 6% simple interest. With this medication the appeal in hand is dismissed.