This appeal and R.FA. No. 18 of 1980, for similarity of facts and points for determination, may be disposed of together by this judgment. A strip of land measuring 628 kanals 17 marlas spreading over and situated in the areas of the two adjoining estates of Yarukhel Pacca and Wattakhel, Tehsil and District Mianwali, was acquired by the Provincial Government for a public purpose, namely, for the construction of Pakistan Air Force Base at Mianwali. Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, indicating the Government's intention to acquire the land was published in the official gazette on the 5th November, 1972. The land owners put forth the demand of compensation at the rate of Rs.5000 per kanal before the Land Acquisition Collector. However, by the award which he announced on the 11th January, 1975, the Collector determined the market value of the land, which he divided into four categories, as follows-- N Nature of landPrice per Kanal
(i) Nehri Rs.800.00
(ii) Nal ChahiRs.800.00
(iii) Barani Rs.500.00
(iv) Banjar Rs.250.00 He determined compensation for standing crops as well and directed that Rs.1000 be paid for the brick kiln to the appellant in R.FA. No. 18 of 1980.
2. 13 kanals 2 marlas of land in Yarukhel estate owned by the appellants was acquired. The appellant in R.F.A. No 18 of 1980, was owner of 10 kanals 12 marlas of land laying in Wattakhel estate which was the subject matter of acquisition. The appellants in the two appeals did not accept the award of the Collector and got the matter referred to the Court for determination of true amount of compensation. The appellant in R.FA. No. 18 of 1980, complained that he had been most inadequately paid for the brick kiln for whose construction he had spent no fewer than Rs.35,500.
The learned Senior Civil Judge, Mianwali, by his judgment of the 27th February, 1979, dismissed the references. Feeling aggrieved the appellants have approached this Court in appeal.
3. Admittedly the acquired land abuts the municipal limits of Mianwali. It is hardly half a mile away from the district Courts. Abadi was fast growing near about it when it was acquired. It was fit for raising construction. As a matter of fact it was taken over by the Government for the purpose of constructing houses for the Pakistan Air Force staff. In the circumstances its division by the Collector A into different categories for ascertaining its market value can be treated as merely artificial. Its value for raising construction can be adjudged at one level. Its value ought to have been assessed keeping in view its close proximity with Mianwali city and the use, namely, that of construction purpose, to which its was being put. It was not justifiable to work out its value on the basis of average of the sale prices of different parcels of land lying for away from the city which of course could not be used for building houses. The parties, especially the appellants, brought on the record copies of a number of mutations for assisting the Court to find out the market value of the land in dispute. The transactions of sales recorded in the mutations, whose copies are Exhs. Pl, P2 and P3, took place after the publication of notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act.
Therefore, they may not be taken into consideration. Similar is the position with regard to the mutations relied upon by the appellant in the other appeal and whose copies are Exhs. P3 to P8.
Only mutations Nos. 3162, 3417 and 3278, copies Exhs. P4, PS and P6, which embody alienations of sales, which were effected before the publication of the notification under section 4, are relevant.
The first mutation is in respect of sale of 4 Kanals of land for Rs.12,000 the second mutation witnesses sale of 1 kanal 10 marlas of land for Rs.1800 and the third mutation bears out sale of 2 kanals 4 marlas of land for Rs.4,000. These pieces of land are stated to be situate near the land in dispute. In the circumstances it is reasonable to accept the rate of Rs.1000 per kanal for calculating the value of the land in dispute. The learned counsel for the respondents was candid enough to agree to use the yardstick of Rs.1000 per kanal to work out the value. Of the land.
4. According to the Government's own record, as is evident from the entries of the Khasra Girdawari register, copy Exh. P10, brick kiln was recorded since Kharif 1971 to be standing on 2 kanals of land of Wattakhel estate. This entry continued till Rabi 1974. The Land Acquisition Collector did not himself visit the spot to assess the value of the brick kiln or the compensation payable therefor. He simply banked upon the report of the Tehsildar which was not formally proved by the respondents. The estimate of Rs.35,377 which appellant in R.FA. No. 18 of 1980 got prepared in respect of the expenditure for setting up the brick kiln, can obviously not be accepted. Nabi Bakhsh, PW2, who prepared the estimate, did not participate in the construction of the brick kiln. No evidence of actual expenditure was produced. The estimate, Exh P2, has been prepared on hypothetical conjectures. However, a brick kiln covering an area of 2 kanals of land could not be valued at Rs.1000 as was done by the Collector. He fixed the compensation of Rs.1000 on the assumption that as reported by the Tehsildar there was a pit. Actually according to the record of the revenue department itself brick kiln was shown to exist right from Kharif 1971 till Rabi 197f: As agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties reasonable compensation of Rs.10,000 needs to be paid to the appellant in R.FA. No. 18 of 1980 for the brick kiln.
5. In view of the above the appeals are accepted, the judgments of the learned trial Judge are set aside and it is directed that the appellants will be paid compensation for acquisition of land worked out at the rate of Rs.1000 per kanal and that the appellant in R.F.A. No. 18 of 1980 will be paid in addition Rs.10,000 for acquisition of his brick kiln. The appellants will get costs of their appeals from the respondents.
H.B.T./F-136/L.
Appeals accepted