' ABDUL LATIF KHAN, J.---This revision has been preferred against the judgment/decree/order dated 30.06.2012, passed by learned Additional District Judge-IV, Mardan whereby appeal filed by petitioners against judgment & decree dated 30.06.2011 passed by learned trial Court was dismissed.
' Arguments heard record perused.
2. A perusal of record reveals that the petitioners filed a suit for declaration that the property acquired by defendants/respondents for extension and re-modeling of Nari drain vide Award No.384 dated 15.8.2005 was owned by them and had taken the possession much prior to the acquisition process to the extent of 27 Kanals 12 Marlas and award was announced after 13 years for the lesser property. The gist of the claim of plaintiff/petitioner is that land shown in the revenue papers and acquired by the Collector is lesser than the land actually has been taken into possession by the defendants/respondents and have demanded compensation of the property in question at a higher value/ compensation.
3. Admittedly the property has been acquired by the government for extension and re-modeling of land for the public purpose and acquisition process was made under Land Acquisition Act, 1894. It was informed that previously the petitioners have asked for enhancement and compensation apportionment u/s 18 r/w 31 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 which was dismissed by learned Land Acquisition Collector, Swabi Scarp WAPDA, Mardan by dint of order dated 21.6.2008 Ex.DW.1/13 which was not questioned by petitioners in any forum and has attained finality.
4. Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 provides the remedy to file Reference to the Court to a person interested who has not accepted the Award, for determination of Referee Court, the objection raised on different grounds including the measurement of land and enhancement of amount of compensation which is the main thrust of instant suit filed by petitioners which shows that the petitioners had the right to raise objection regarding instant claim before Referee Court in terms of referred section which has already been availed and has failed to get remedy in the year 2008 and instead of pursing the matter has filed the instant suit which is not maintainable.
5. The Award speaks about the presence of petitioners who raised the objection and thereafter reference was filed u/s 18 of the act ibid which was dismissed. The report of local commissioner shows that other Khasra numbers are also mentioned apart from disputed khasra number. The petitioners/plaintiffs have received the compensation of acquired land without raising any objection and are debarred to raise objection at this juncture as proviso to Section 31 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 restrains a person from filing reference u/s 18 of the Act ibid who has received the amount otherwise than protest. A specific procedure has been provided under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the aggrieved person for redressal of his grievance with special reference to the measurement of land and enhancement of compensation amount through seeking a Reference u/s 18 of the Act and being special enactment would prevail. Civil Court though has ample power to adjudicate the civil disputes despite ouster of its jurisdiction, if no other efficacious remedy is available to the aggrieved person or based upon fact constituting lack of jurisdiction of the tribunal/authority and tainted with malice. As specific remedy is available to the person agreed by acquisition award civil Court had no jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter.
6. The Courts below have decided the lis pending before them with conscious and application of independent mind warrants no interference.
' For the aforesaid reasons, this petition being devoid of merit is dismissed.