1. SARDAR SAID MUHAMMAD KHAN, C.J.---This appeal has been directed against the judgment of the High Court, dated 18-4-1998, whereby the compensation amount of the land acquired was enhanced by 60 per cent. Per Kanal.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the Government acquired land for the construction of road from Muzaffarabad Town to Airport which was to pass through different villages. The Collector Land Acquisition fixed the compensation amount on the basis of kinds of various pieces of land acquired which varied from 30 to 50 thousand rupees per Kanal plus 15 per cent. 'Jabrana'. Feeling dissatisfied with the compensation amount fixed the respondent and other landowners initiated different references to the District Judge who entrusted the same to the Additional District Judge for hearing. The Additional District Judge without framing the issues enhanced the compensation amount by 30 per cent. The judgment of the Additional District Judge was appealed against by the appellant, herein; before the High Court. The High Court not only dismissed the appeal filed by the appellants, herein, but increased the compensation amount by fixing the same at the rate of 60,000 per Kanal.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the High Court has ignored the fact that neither issues were framed nor any evidence was recorded and the learned Additional District Judge enhanced the amount arbitrarily by- 30 per cent without any evidence. No appeal was filed by the respondent, herein, but despite that compensation amount was further enhanced by the High Court and the appeal filed by the appellant, herein, was dismissed alongwith other appeals.
4. The learned counsel for the respondent, Mr. Ghulam Mustafa Mughal, has not much to say in view of the aforesaid facts.
5. It may be observed that as the Code of Civil Procedure is applicable to the reference proceedings before the District Judge, it was incumbent upon the Additional District Judge to frame issues and thereafter giving the parties opportunity to lead evidence in support of their respective contentions, decide the case according to law. The Additional District Judge has arbitrarily enhanced the compensation amount by 30 per cent without any material on the record. Thereafter, instead of accepting the appeal filed by the appellants, the same was dismissed and without any appeal by the respondent further enhanced the amount by fixing the compensation as 60,000 per Kanal.
6. Under these circumstances, we have no alternative but to set aside the judgment of the High Court and the Additional District Judge and remand the case to the Additional District Judge with the direction that he shall proceed with the trial of the reference in light of the observations made above and decide the same afresh according to law.