' IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, J.---Petitioners seek leave to appeal against the judgment of the Peshawar High Court dated 11-12-1995 passed in Writ Petition No,648 of 1995.
2. Madad Khan Orakzai, respondent No,1 herein instituted a suit for possession through pre-emption in respect of the suit property. During the pendency of the suit a portion of the suit' land measuring about 160 Kanals was acquired by the Peshawar Development Authority (hereinafter call the P.D.A.).
The application moved by respondent No,1 for amendment of the plaint and for impleading the P.D.A. And Muslim Commercial Bank as parties to the suit was dismissed by the trial Court vide order dated 10-11-1993. Revision petition against the aforesaid order was dismissed by the High Court. Thereafter, respondent No,1 moved a petition for leave to appeal before this Court which was converted into civil appeal bearing No,583 of 1994 vide order dated 6-7-1994 and disposed of with the following observations:-- "Therefore, while we agree with the learned Judge in chambers that there was no-cause of action against P.D.A. And M.C.B. And therefore, they could not be joined as parties in the suit, we would modify the judgment of the learned Judge in Chambers to that extent that the amount of compensation in respect of the acquired land by the P.D.A. Will be deposited in the pending pre- emption suit, which on deposit will be invested in some profit bearing scheme by the Court and shall be paid to the party who is found entitled to it on the final disposal of the suit."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the petitioners being owners of the suit land were paid compensation according to their entitlement and that there was no direction by this Court to the petitioners for re-deposit of compensation received by them.
4. We are afraid that there is no force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. The directions contained in the order dated 6-7-1994 passed by this Court in Civil Appeal No,583 of 1994 have been expressed in clear and unambiguous terms that amount of compensation in respect of acquired land shall be deposited in the pending pre-emption suit. The petitioners have admittedly received the amount of compensation in respect of acquired land by the P.D.A. We, therefore, see no reason why it should not be deposited by the petitioners in the pending pre-emption suit before the trial Court. The impugned order of the High Court is perfectly valid and in conformity with the judgment of this Court referred above, warranting no interference.
The petition, therefore, fails and is hereby dismissed. Leave to appeal is refused.