' Land measuring 107 Kanals, 12 Marlas situated in Mauza Allah Dadkhel Tehsil and District Mardan was acquired for the construction, widening and remodelling of "Bandai Drain" under the Swabi Scarp WAPDA, Mardan vide Award No,28, dated 14-5-1997. The Land Acquisition Collector fixed compensation for the said land at the rate of Rs,2,343 per Marla. The landowners were also given compulsory acquisition charges at the rate of 15 per cent. And simple interest at the rate of six per cent. The respondents, who were landowners of the land measuring 2 Kanals, 10 Marlas being not contented with the amount of compensation fixed by the Collector Land Acquisition filed objection petition which was referred to the learned Referee Judge for determination. The learned Land Acquisition Judge after framing issues, recording pro and contra evidence of the parties, enhanced the rate of compensation of the land to Rs,3,700 per Marla but the compulsory acquisition charges and the interest were kept intact vide judgment and decree dated 24-4-2003. Being aggrieved with the said judgment and decree, the appellant have filed the appeal in hand.
2. Mr. Abdul Qadir Khattak, the learned counsel representing the appellants, argued that the learned trial Court had itself admitted in the judgment that there was no evidence available from the objectors' side which warranted enhancement but it of his own, while relying upon Award No,8, dated 28-1-1996 enhanced the amount of compensation for which there was no justification on record.
3. It was also argued that Sherzada who had appeared on his own behalf and on behalf of another objector as attorney, in his cross-examination admitted that the acquired land was not fit for Abadi and agricultural purposes, therefore, there was no justification for enhancement of compensation.
4. It was also argued that the other landowners whose land had been acquired were satisfied with the amount of compensation fixed by the Collector Land Acquisition, hence they did not file any objection petition, therefore, the objection petition filed by the respondents needed dismissal.
5. On the other hand, Haji Muhammad Umar Khan, the learned counsel representing the respondents/landowners, argued that land measuring 2 Kanals, 5 Marlas was Shah Nehri in its nature while 5 Marlas of the land was "Ghair Mumkin". This position was appreciated by the learned Referee Court.
6. It was further argued that some other land was also acquired for widening and remodelling of "Bandai Drain" under the Swabi Scarp WAPDA, Mardan vide Awan No,8, dated 28-1-1996, copy whereof was placed on record as Exh.RW.2/0-1. According to the said award, per Marla a sum of Rs,3,700 was fixed as compensation for Shah Nehri land, Dagga Abadi and tubewell Abadi plus 15 per cent. Compulsory acquisition charges and interest at the rate of six per cent. The said Award was made prior to the present Award (in this case), therefore, the learned Referee Judge had justifiably enhanced the amount of compensation.
7. It was also argued that the land of the respondents was categorized in Category "E". The landowners appeared before the Collector, Land Acquisition and stated that their land was situated within the municipal limits but there is no such rebuttal available on record that the acquired land was not situated within the municipal limits.
8. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record of the case.
9. In all, land measuring 107 Kanals, 12 Marlas was acquired for the construction, widening and remodelling of "Bandai Drain" under the Swabi Scarp WAPDA, Mardan vide Award No,28, dated 14- 5-1997. The Collector Land Acquisition placed the acquired land in five categories i.e, from (a) to (e). Compensation of the said categorized land was assessed keeping in view the distance of the acquired land from the metallic road. The Collector Land Acquisition fixed compensation for the acquired land at the rate of Rs,2,343 per Marla but the learned Referee Court after appreciating the evidence available on record and keeping in view the Award of 28-1-1996 Exh.R.W.2/O-1 enhanced the amount of compensation to Rs,3,700 per Marla.
10. The question that requires determination in this case is as to whether the compensation for the acquired land has been fixed in accordance with section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Answer to this question is in positive. While dealing with the question of fixation of compensation in Government of N.W.F.P through Collector Mardan and others v. Abdul Samad Khan and others PLD 2002 SC 422, Nisar Ahmad Khan and others v. Land Acquisition Collector, Swabi and others PLD 2002 SC 25, Province of Punjab through Collector, Attock v. Engineer Jamil Ahmad Malik and others 2000 SCM R 870 and Murad Khan through his widow and 13 others v. Land Acquisition Collector, Peshawar and another 1999 SCM R 1647 the august Supreme Court of Pakistan laid down crieteria.
In paras (iv) and (xiii) of last judgment the following principles are quoted below for convenience:- "(iv) The best method of determination of the market price of the plots of land under the acquisition is to rely on instances of sale of it near about the date of notification under section 4(i) of the Land Acquisition Act. The next best method is to take into consideration the instances of sale of the adjacent lands made shortly before and after the notification. When the market value is to be determined on the basis of the instances of sale of land in the neighbouring locality, the potential value of the land need not be separately awarded because such sales cover the potential value.
(xiii) The value of the land of the adjoining area which was simultaneously acquired and for which different formula of compensation has been adopted, should be taken into consideration."
11. The august Supreme Court of Pakistan in the above mentioned cases laid down that the basic method is to take into consideration the instances of sale of the adjacent land made shortly before and after the notifiction. The market value is to be determined on the basis of the instances of sale of land in-the neighbouring locality, the potential value of the land need not be separately awarded because such sale covers the potential value. Moreover, the value of the land of the adjoining area which was simultaneously acquired and for which different formula of compensation had been adopted, should also be taken into consideration.
12. In the case in hand, copy of Award No,8, dated 28-1-1996 has been placed on record as Exh.RW.2/O-1. According to said Award No,8, land measuring 47 Kanals, 18 Marlas at village Jori Banda was acquired for remodelling of "Bandai-Drain" i.e, for the same purpose for which the land in question had been acquired. The said Award No,8 was announced on 28-1-1996 but the learned Collector Land Acquisition had fixed a sum of Rs,3,700 per Marla for Shah Nehri land and for Dagga Abadi and tubewell Abadi Rs,3,800 per Marla. The Award No,28 for the land acquired in the case in hand was published on 14-5-1997 i.e, after about one year and four months of Award No,8 mentioned above. It is well-known that there is a trend of rise in the prices of land of area. The learned Court below while fixing the compensation at the rate of Rs,3,700 per Marla for the acquired land had, therefore, committed no illegality, rather the compensation had been fixed as per guidelines provided by the august Supreme Court of Pakistan as well as this Court in various judgments thus, I do not feel inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and decree.
Resultantly, the appeal in hand is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.