ABDUL SHAKOOR, J. Through the instant petition, the present petitioners, who are the judgment debtors in case titled "Mst. Tajrian and others v. Secretary Ministry of Agriculture and Forest and 3 others", have called into question the concurrent findings of both the Courts below, whereby their suit has been dismissed concurrently.
2. Facts of the case are that the present petitioners filed a suit bearing No.374/1 on 30.11.2004 against respondents seeking possession of the suit property as well as recovery of Rs.20,000/- as mense profit. It has further been averred in the plaint that suit property is the owner ship of the petitioners/plaintiffs and respondents/ defendants had only acquired an area of 16 marlas from the said property which was divided into khasras Nos.2859/1 and 2859/2. It has further been alleged in the plaint that in the former khasra ownership of the petitioners was intact which was mortgaged with Habib Bank Limited but after recent redemption of stated khasra from bank, it came to their knowledge that the respondents had illegally occupied the same. The suit was contested by the respondents by filing written statements. From the divergent pleadings of the parties, the learned trial Court framed as many as eight issues, whereafter the parties were asked to produce their respective evidence. After hearing arguments of learned counsel of both the parties, the learned trial Court dismissed their suit vide impugned judgment/decree dated 30.07.2011. The petitioners, therefore, preferred an appeal before the learned appellate Court, which also was dismissed, vide order dated 13.02.2014, hence the instant revision petition before this Court.
3. Arguments of the learned counsel for the parties heard and the record was gone through.
4. It is the case of petitioners that their share in the Suit khasra No.2859/1 was neither acquired by the respondent department nor it had ever made any compensation till filing of the suit before the learned trial Court and thus the respondents have occupied their property illegally and forcibly.
5. A thorough scanning of the record and evidence brought on the record clearly depict that the disputed khasra bearing No.2859/1 was included in notification dated 05.10.1954 issued for the acquisition of the land under the Land Acquisition Act for the Forest Collage in Peshawar University.
Ironically, the petitioners have not taken any step at the relevant time against the respondents, either for return of their land or payment of compensation on the acquisition of land in question.
They have not filed any objection petition at the relevant time against the said acquisition before the proper forum i.e. Collector Land Acquisition under the provision of the Land Acquisition Act.
6. Undeniably, the land in question was acquired for the Forest Collage at Peshawar University way back in the year 1957 by the respondent department after fully observing the legal requirement laid down in the Land Acquisition Act. It is also not out of context to mention here that the respondents has been using the land in question since its acquisition i.e. 1957, but the petitioners have brought the suit for possession of the same land from respondents before the learned Civil Judge, Peshawar on 30.11.2004 after lapse of about 40 years, thus the very suit of the petitioners was hopelessly barred by time. The scrutiny of the findings of the learned trial Court as well as Appellate Court would show that both have committed no illegality in reaching to conclusion that petitioners have failed to make out a case for possession of the land in question.
7. Although, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners argued at length but could not point out any illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional error in the impugned judgments/decrees of the fora below, so as to warrant any interference of this Court in its revisional jurisdiction
8. For the stated reasons, I find no merit in the instant petition, which is dismissed accordingly, with no order as to cost.