Ghulam Mustafa Mughal, J.-- The captioned petition for leave to appeal has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 14.02.2019 passed by the Azad Jammu & Kashmir High Court in Civil Appeal No.19 of 201 1.
2. The facts forming the background of the captioned petition for leave to appeal are that the land belonging to the petitioner , herein, and others comprising khewat No.10, khata no.30 to 32, khewat No.59, khata No.155, 157 to 159, situated in Dhairi Sultanpur , Tehsil and District Mirpur , was acquired by the Collector Land Acquisition vide award No.119/2007, drawn on 10.09.2007, for the purpose of upraising of Mangla Dam. The Collector categorized the land and fixed the compensation amount for its kind hail to the tune of Rs.5,50,000/- per kanal and for mera awal to the tune of Rs.4,50,000/- per kanal besides 15% compulsory acquisition charges. Feeling aggrieved from the said determination of the compensa tion by the Collector , the landowners filed reference before the learned Reference Judge on 06.03.2010, for enhancement in the compensation. It was stated that the Collector has fixed the compensation of their land arbitrarily without taking into account its commercial nature and potential value. It was further stated that the market value of the acquired land is not less than Rs.80,00,000/- per kanal, hence, solicited enhancement to the tune of the said amount. The reference was contested by the other side by filing objections, whereby, the claim of the landowners was refuted. It was stated that the landowners have not produced any evidence in support of their claim, hence, their reference application may be dismissed. The learned Reference Judge framed issues in light of the pleadings of the parties and asked them to lead evidence in support of their respective stand. At the conclusion of the proceedings, the learned Reference Judge vide judgment and decree dated 10.01.2011 enhanced the compensation amount of the acquired land to the tune of Rs.5,90,000/- per kanal for its kind hail, and Rs.4,80,000/- per kanal for its kind mera awal besides 15% compulsory acquisition charges. The landowners again felt aggrieved from the judgment and decree of the learned Reference Judge and challenged the same before the Azad Jammu & Kashmir High Court by way of appeal on 14.02.2019 for further enhancement of the compensation. The learned High Court after hearing the parties through the impugned judgment dated 14.02.2019 has dismissed the appeal.
3. Ch. Jahandad Khan, the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner argued that the impugned award was issued on 10.09.2007, whereas, the notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, was issued on 01.11.2005. He further submitted that the award has not been completed within the statutory period which has rendered the whole proceedings void but the Collector as well as the Courts below have not considered this aspect of the matter. The learned Advocate further argued that the Collector as well as the Reference Judge has illegally ignored the oral evidence and the sale-deeds dated 03.05.2003 and 03.11.2005 which were the relevant documents and were discussed by the Collector himself in the award. The learned Advocate further argued that had these document been considered the conclusion of the Reference Judge as well as the High Court would have been different. The learned Advocate further argued that the High Court has not even discussed the evidence as well as legal impact of the sale-deeds, hence, the impugned judgment is not lawful and is liable to be set aside.
4. Conversely, Mr. Javaid Najam-us-Saqib, the learned Advocate appearing for the other side vehemently argued that a new case has been built up by the petitioner, herein, and the question of delayed award has neither been taken before the Courts below not is incorporated in the pleadings, therefore, the same cannot be allowed to be raised. The learned Advocate further argued that the Collector has reasonably assessed the compensation and enhancement made by the learned Reference Judge is not justified but even then the same has been maintained by the learned High Court. The learned Advocate further argued that the Courts below have properly appreciated the available evidence and it cannot be said that any misreading and non-reading of the same is made out.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record made available, I am of the view that the question, as to whether, the sale-deeds brought on the record have rightly not been considered by the Reference Judge as well as the High Court, is a legal question of public importance which require resolution in a regular appeal. Leave to appeal is, therefore, granted to consider the same. The petitioner is directed to deposited security of Rs.1000/- within one month failing which the leave granting order shall automatically be deemed to have been rescinded. The office is directed to complete the file and place the same before the Hon'ble Chief Justice for constitution of the Bench.