Ghulam Mustafa Mughal, J.-- The captioned petition for leave to appeal has been directed against the judgment dated 26.2.2019 passed by the Azad Jammu & Kashmir High Court in civil appeal No. 390 of 2012.
2. The precise facts forming the background of the captioned petition for leave to appeal are that the petitioner, herein, filed a reference application before the Reference Judge, Mangla Dam Raising Project Mirpur on 21.9.2011 alleging therein that the residential house of the petitioner situated in Moheri Pinyam Farnal Chaksawari Tehsil and District Mirpur which is consisted of three rooms, one toilet and compound wall bearing Code No. CPM/289, was acquired by the Collector vide award No. 1050/11 dated 26.1.2011 and the Collector has determined the compensation of the same as Rs.474460/- while treating it as Cattle Shed and without hearing the petitioner has announced the award. It was averred that the Collector , against the law and facts and just to cause harm to the valuable rights of the petitioner has shown the residential house of the petitioner as cattle shed at the time of award. The petitioner prayed that while cancelling the award issued on 26.1.201 1 the compensation of the house of the petitioner may be determined as 10,00,000/- while treating the same as residential house instead of cattle shed. On filing of the reference the respondents were summoned. Respondent No. 1 and 3 were proceeded ex-parte as despite of service, nobody on their behalf turned up, however , the Collector contested the reference by filing objections, whereby it was stated by him that the reference is beyond the limitation, hence, is not sustainable.
It was further stated that the compensation has been determined as per market value after spot inspection. The Reference Judge in light of the pleading of the parties framed issues. At the conclusion of the proceedings vide judgment and decree dated 18.9.2012 the learned Reference Judge enhanced the compensation in the terms that the petitioner shall be entitled to receive Rs.1,18,615/- in addition to already fixed compensation and she was also declared entitled to receive 15% compulsory acquisition charges on the enhanced amount. Feeling aggrieved from the said judgment the petitioner , herein, filed an appeal before the Azad Jammu & Kashmir High Court on 22.12.2012. The learned High Court vide impugned judgment and decree dated 26.2.2019 while upholding the judgment and decree passed by the Reference Judge has dismissed the appeal.
3. Mr. Muhammad Siddique Chaudhry, the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner has argued that the house of the petitioner, herein, was acquired vide award No. 1050/11 dated 26.1.2011, but the Collector while assessing the compensation has treated the same as cattle shed and awarded compensation of the same as such. The learned Advocate further argued that on reference the learned Reference Judge has enhanced the compensation to the tune of Rs.1,18,000/- but treated the house as cattle shed. While referring to Exh. "PH" the report of building replacement cost valuation available at page 27 of the paper book, the learned Advocate argued with vehemence that the house having Code No. CPM-289 was acquired and it consists of 3 rooms and one kitchen and both room, hence, cannot be treated as cattle shed. He argued that it was enjoined upon the Collector and the Reference Judge as well as the learned High Court to determine the compensation of the house.
4. Mr. Javed Najam-us-Saqib, the learned Advocate appearing for the respondent has defended the impugned judgment of the High Court and argued that no any evidence with regard to proof of existence of the house has been placed on record. He further argued that no any legal question of law of public importance is involved in the petition for leave to appeal, hence, the same may be refused.
5. After hearing the learned Advocates representing the parties and perusing Exh. "PH" relied upon by the counsel for the petitioner , I am of the view that the question as to whether document "Exh. PH" has not been properly appreciated and misread by the Courts below is a legal question of public importance, which can only be resolved in regular appeal. Leave is, therefore, granted to consider the same. The petitioner is directed to deposit security of Rs.1000/- failing which the leave granti ng order shall automatically stand resci nded. The office is directed to complete the file and place the same before the Hon'ble Chief Justice for constitution of bench.