Land Acquisition Compensation and Determination of Fair Market Value.
 |
مضمون: زمین کی خریداری اور منصفانہ معاوضہ
عدالتی پس منظر
تحریری جواب میں گریزاں انکار
زمین کے معاوضے کا تعین
وقت کی حد اور اپیلیں
اہم مشاہدات
(a) سول پروسیجر کوڈ
(b) زمین کے معاوضے کا تعین:
(c) وقت کی پابندی:
Must read Judgement
2024 C L C 1
[Lahore (Rawalpindi Bench)]
Before Mirza Viqas Rauf and Jawad Hassan, JJ
NATIONAL COMMAND AUTHORITY through D.G. SPD, Rawalpindi and others----Appellants
Versus
ZAHOOR AZAM and others----Respondents
R.F.A. No.83 of 2014, decided on 14th June, 2023.
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)---
----O. VIII, R. 5---Written statement---Evasive denial---Scope---Evasive denial in written statement is nothing but an admission of fact on the part of defendant.
(b) Land Acquisition Act (I of 1894)---
----Ss. 23 & 28---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.25---Valuation of land---Potential value and market value---Principle---Price Assessment Committee---Value determination---Potential value of land a dominant factor---Appellant/Authority was aggrieved of enhancement of compensation by Referee Court---Validity---Market value is only one of such factors to be considered for the purpose of award of compensation to the land owners---Location, neighborhood, potentiality or other benefits, which may ensue from the land in future cannot be ignored---Most dominant and guiding factor will be that the compensation should be determined at the price, which a willing buyer will pay to a seller as per his satisfaction---Compensation cannot be awarded to the "land owners" as a bounty of State---Fair compensation for acquired land was that which a willing vendor would accept on account of sale of his property---It was bounden duty of Land Acquisition Collector to take into consideration all relevant factors, while determining amount of compensation instead of relying upon compensation assessed by Price Assessment Committee or the Board of Revenue---Land owners were entitled for compensation at the rate of Rs.20,00,000/- (twenty lacs) per Kanal but Referee Court held them entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs.60,00,000/- per Kanal without properly evaluating the evidence---Land in question was situated in the proximity of other acquired land and could not be bifurcated---Law did not allow any discrimination amongst the equal---There were though no distinctive features in the case of respondent / land owners but another land owner was treated in a discriminatory manner, which had offended mandate of Art.25 of the Constitution---Appeal was disposed of accordingly.
Federation of Pakistan through Secretary Ministry of Defence and another v. Jaffar Khan and others PLD 2010 SC 604; Askari Cement Limited (Formerly Associated Cement Limited) through Chief Executive v. Land Acquisition Collector (Industries) Punjab and others 2013 SCMR 1644; Manzoor Hussain (deceased) through L.Rs. v. Misri Khan PLD 2020 SC 749; Muhammad Iqbal v. Mehboob Alam 2015 SCMR 21; Gulzar Hussain v. Abdur Rehman and another 1985 SCMR 301; Pervaiz Akhtar and others v. Land Acquisition Collector and others PLD 2022 Lah. 730; Federal Government of Pakistan through Ministry of Defence Rawalpindi and others v. Mst. Zakia Begum and others PLD 2023 SC 277; Mst. Akhtar Sultana v. Major Retd. Muzaffar Khan Malik through his legal heirs and others PLD 2021 SC 715; Air Weapon Complex through DG v. Muhammad Aslam and others 2018 SCMR 779; Province of Punjab through Land Acquisition Collector and another v. Begum Aziza 2014 SCMR 75 and Land Acquisition Collector, G.S.C., N.T.D.C., (WAPDA), Lahore and another v. Mst. Surraya Behmood Jan 2015 SCMR 28 rel.
(c) Limitation---
----Time barred appeal---Pendency of appeals---Principle---If more than one appeals arise out of a common judgment and if one or more of those appeals are even barred by time, same cannot be dismissed on account of limitation.
Mehreen Zaibun Nisa v. Land Commissioner, Multan and others PLD 1975 SC 397 and Principal Public School Sangota, Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Chief Secretary and others v. Sarbiland and others 2022 SCMR 189 rel.
Usman Jillani and Waseem Doga for Appellants (in R.F.As. Nos. 83, 84 of 2014, Respondent No.3 in R.F.A. No.53 of 2014 and Respondent No.2. in R.F.A. No.155 of 2016).
Tanvir Iqbal Khan for Appellants (in R.F.A. No.53 of 2014).
Muhammad Asif Ch. for Appellants (in R.F.A. No.155 of 2016).
Ch. Imran Hassan Ali for Respondents Nos.1 to 5 and 8
(in R.F.A. No.83 of 2014).
Muhammad Siddique Awan, Additional Attorney General for Pakistan for Respondents No.6 (in R.F.A. No.83, Respondent No.3 in R.F.A. No.84 and Respondent No.2 in R.F.A. No.53 of 2014).
Malik Amjad Ali, Additional Advocate General for Punjab for Respondent No.7 (in R.F.A. No.83, Respondent No.4 in R.F.A. No.84 and Respondent No.1 in R.F.As. Nos.53 of 2014 and 155 of 2016).
Tanvir Iqbal Khan for Respondents Nos.1 and 2 (in R.F.A. No.84 of 2014)