Pakistan Case Law← Search
2001 SCMR 1859

PROJECT DIRECTOR, GSC NTDC, WAPDA, MULTAN and others vs ASIF NADEEM

Citation2001 SCMR 1859
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Judge(s)Irshad Hasan Khan, Muhammad Arif, Qazi Muhammad Farooq
ResultPetition dismissed

' IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, C.J.---This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment dated 21-10-1999 passed by the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan in R.F.A. No,10 of 1989 whereby the learned Judge in Chambers enhanced the compensation from Rs,1,500 to Rs,3,000 per Marla.

2. The relevant facts are that at the instance of and for the requirement of WAPDA the Collector, Dera Ghazi Khan, after completing usual formalities, acquired a piece of land measuring 73 Kanals and 16 Marlas for construction of a 132 K.V. Grid Station and announced his award on 19-5-1982 determining compensation at the rate of Rs,716.66 per Marla.

3. Earlier, on a reference made by the Land Acquisition Collector to the Civil Court under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act for adjudication of the dispute, the learned Senior Civil Judge enhanced the compensation to Rs,1,500 per Marla holding the same to be market value of the disputed land.

He also held that respondents are entitled to compulsory acquisition charges at the rate of 15% and interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of delivery of the possession.

4. Being aggrieved with the compensation allowed by the Civil Court, the respondents approached the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench through R.F.A. No,10 of 1989. The learned Judge in Chambers, after hearing the parties further enhanced the compensation on Rs,3,000 per Marla vide the impugned judgment dated 21-10-190 on the ground that at the relevant time Rs,3,000 was the market price of the land in dispute as it was earlier decided vide R.F.A. No,74 of 1983 wherein the rate of compensation was fixed at Rs,3,000 per Marla with regard to a piece of land contiguous to the land in question.

5. That being so, we do not find any legal flaw or infirmity in the order passed by the Teamed Judge in Chambers enhancing the compensation from Rs,1,500 to Rs,3,000 per Marla. We also find that the High Court was right in treating the appeal within time on the ground stated in the impugned order.

6. Resultantly, the petition is dismissed and leave declined.

For educational and research use only β€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerΒ·PrivacyΒ·TermsΒ·Search