This joint appeal by various persons whose lands had been acquired by --the Provincial Government for the construction of residential and non-residential buildings in connection with the upgrading of the then existing Civil Hospital, Gujranwala, and whose applications referred under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (I of 1894), by the Collector seeking enhancement of compensation assessed by the Collector were dismissed by the learned Administrative Civil Judge, Gujranwala, by his consolidated judgment on the 100 November, 1969, arises out of the following circumstances. The subject matter of acquisition consisted of a piece of land covering an area of 10 acres whose ownership was shared by small land holder. Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act indicating the Government's intention of acquiring the land was issued can the 24th April, 1963, and was published in the official gazette on the 27th September, 1963.
2. The land in dispute was situate in the Civil Lines area of Gujranwala and commanded a good position; District Courts, offices of District Officers, two Railway Stations of Gujranwala and Gujranwala City, Bus Stand and Banks were nearby. The land owners dubbed the tentative estimated price of Rs.28,000.00 per acre to be ridiculously low and represented to the Land Acquisition Collector that if the land were to be put to auction it would fetch more than four times the estimated price. The Collector declined to take into account prices of sales of some parcels of land effected a year before the publication of notification under section 4 of the Act simply because he considered them to be inflated and abnormally excessive. He worked out compensation on the basis of average of prices entered in mutations of sales of his choice which came to Rs.21,000.00 per acre. Giving an allowance of Rs.1000,00 per acre for the upward trend in price he evaluated the land for the purpose of compensation at the rate of Rs.22,000.00 per acre.
The land owners were entitled to additional amount of 15 per cent in respect of compulsory acquisition.
3. Being dissatisfied with the Collector's award the land owners got the matter referred to the Civil Court for determination of true amount of compensation. They emphasised the importance of location of the land and contended that sales of lands quite nearby before the publication of notification under section 4 had fetched prices of not less than Rs.20,000.00 per Kanal. Muhammad Sharif and others maintained that one kanal of land, which had been acquired, had been purchased by them on the 11th April, 1962, through registered sale deed for Rs.6000,00. They asked for increase in compensation and pegged their demand at higher than Rs.1,60,000,00 per acre.
4. The land owners' move for getting the compensation enhanced was opposed by the Collector and the Government. They denied the land owners' claim and asserted the correctness of the award.
5. The learned Administrative Civil Judge, Gujranwala, seized with the trial of the reference, considered the Collector's award to be fair, proper and reasonable and, therefore, did not interfere therewith. He observed that the market value of the lands of the applicants was no more than that fixed by the Collector. Consequently he dismissed the references.
6. The appellants have made grievance of the fact that neither the Land Acquisition Collector nor the learned Administrative Civil Judge adverted to or tried to deal with the evidence which they had produced in order to persuade them properly to fix the market value of the land. Their complaint is not without substance. Neither the Collector nor the learned Administrative Civil Judge cared to discuss and appreciate the evidence adduced by the appellants before them.
Indisputably one kanal of land, forming part of ten acres of the acquired land, had been purchased by Muhammad Sharif and others on the 11th April, 1962, that is more than a year and a quarter before the publication of notification under section 4 for Rs.6000,00 per registered sale deed (Exh.
A2 on the file of application of Muhammad Sharif and others). This sale price in itself furnished a good criterion for assessing the market value of the land in dispute which was not dissimilar to the aforesaid piece of one kanal of land.
6-A. One Noor Hussain, son of Chaudhry Allah Ditta, carved out small plots measuring 50 feet x 25 feet each out of his 16 kanals 3 marlas of land, which was lying within a distance of hardly a furlong from the land in dispute, and sold two such plots for Rs.9600.00, as is evident from the perusal of the registered sale deed whose copy is Exh. A1. Exh. A2 (on the file of application of Abdul Ghafoor and another) is the sale deed executed on the 16th September, 1961, and registered on the 15th October, 1961, witnessing sale of 4-1 /2 marlas of land, not much away from the land in question, for the purpose of construction of a house for Rs.20,000.00. By means of the deed, Exh. A3, executed and registered on the 11th April, 1962, sale of 9 marlas of land, located in the vicinity of the land in dispute, took place for Rs.3000.00. A piece of one kanal and four marlas of land lying in the Civil Lines area of Gujranwala was sold for Rs.11,000.00 on the 25th May, 1962, by means of a registered deed of sale whose copy is Exh P.W.10/1. The appellants placed on the record copies of eleven mutations, Exhs. A5 to A15, incorporating sales of lands brought about by registered sale-deeds whose particulars, including area of land sold and sale price, are given in the following table--- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 S.NoExhibit No.Mutation No.Date of registration of Sale-deedDate of entry of mutationDate of attestation of mutationArea of land sold Kanals MarlasSale Price
1. A-5 713 15-4-1963 15-5-1963 12-6-1963 0 18 Rs.1,000.00 2.A-6 693 5-10-1961 2-12-1961 17-12-1961 0 9 Rs.3,000.00 3.A-7 702 21-3-1962 12-5-1962 6-3-1992 0 4-- Rs.2,000.00 4.A-8 712 15-4-1963 15-5-1963 12-6-1963 1 0 Rs.18,000.00 5.A-9 710 10-8-1962 2-9-1962 28-11-1962 0 9 Rs.9,000.00 6.A-10 709 31-5-1962 29-8-1962 28-11-1962 1 4 Rs.11,000.00 7.A-11 703 11-4-1962 22-6-1962 9-7-1962 1 0 Rs.6,000.00 8.A-12 707 6-8-1962 29-8-1962 31-8-1962 4 0 Rs.10,000.00 9.A-13 723 30-11-1965 22-2-1966 28-2-1966 0 9 Rs.4,500.00 10.A-14 721 18-11-1963 11-12-1964 23-12-1964 1 0 Rs.4,000.00 11.A-15 720 19-9-1963 11-12-1964 29-12-1964 0 11 Rs.5,000.00
7. The respondents placed on the record copies of three mutations, Exhs R1, R2 and R3, in respect of sales of lands lying in the estate of Gujranwala Cantonment effected through registered sale deeds. The particulars of the sales are set out in the following table:- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 S.NoExhibit No.Mutation No.Date of registration of Sale-deedDate of entry of mutationDate of attestation of mutationArea of land sold Kanals MarlasSale Price
1. R-1 707 6-8-1962 9-8-1962 31-8-1962 4 0 Rs.10,000.00 2.R-2 708 10-8-1962 29-8-1962 28-11-1962 3 0 Rs.2,000.00 3.R-3 713 15-4-1963 15-5-1963 12-6-1963 0 18 Rs.1,000.00 The respondents also placed on the record the statement, Exh 114, giving the average of prices of different sales of lands pertaining to which mutations were sanctioned from the 24th April, 1962 to 12th,tune, 1963; the average price is Rs.4353.60 per kanal. However, Muhammad Rafiq, Patwari, R.W.1, who prepared this document and proved it, did not bring the registers of mutations from which the said document was prepared when he came into the witness box for examination. Therefore, the appellants had no opportunity to cross-examine him regarding and test the correctness of the entries of this document.
8. The lands, whose sales appear in the mutations (copies Exhs A 1 to A10, I A12 to A15 and Exhs. Rl to R3), lie scattered in different parts of Gujranwala Cantonment estate and according to their location could very well be differently evaluated. Smaller pieces of lands, generally used for construction of buildings, would usually fetch higher price. Therefore, the prices given in these mutations cannot be applied with an exact decree of certitude to assess the value of the land in dispute. Nevertheless, the price Rs.6000.00, quoted for one kanal of land in mutation No.703 (copy Exh. A11), which forms part of the land in dispute and which Muhammad Sharif and others purchased through the sale deed, Exh A2 on the file of Muhammad Sharif and others, hardly a year before the acquisition of land, does furnish a good standard for ascertaining the value of the acquired land. Even if the concession of rise in price during a year is not granted to the appellants it would be legitimate to fix the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.6000.00 per kanal.
Accordingly the appeal is accepted with costs, the impugned judgment is set aside and it is directed that the appellants will be 6 paid compensation at the rate of RS.6000.00 per kanal of their land acquired plus 15 per cent thereof as compulsory acquisition allowance.
M.Y.H./M-1494/L