| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 2311 2017 SLD 2311 2017 CLC 440 |
Supreme Court (AJ&K)
Civil Appeals Nos. 128, 129, 130 of 2013, decision Dated: 29-4-2015. Hearing Date : 22-4-2015. (On appeal from the judgment and decree of the High Court Dated 13.02.2013 in Civil Appeals Nos. 162, 169, 184, 205 and 235-A of 2008).
RAJA SAEED AKRAM KHAN, JUSTICE
Sardar Muhammad Azam Khan and Ch. Shah Wali, Advocates for Appellants (in Civil Appeals Nos.128, 129 and 130 of 2013). Mirza Ziadullah, Advocate for
Respondents (in Civil Appeals Nos.128, 129 and 130 of 2013).
Civil Appeals Nos. 128, 129, 130 of 2013, decision Dated: 29-4-2015. Hearing Date : 22-4-2015. (On appeal from the judgment and decree of the High Court Dated 13.02.2013 in Civil Appeals Nos. 162, 169, 184, 205 and 235-A of 2008).
RAJA SAEED AKRAM KHAN, JUSTICE
Sardar Muhammad Azam Khan and Ch. Shah Wali, Advocates for Appellants (in Civil Appeals Nos.128, 129 and 130 of 2013). Mirza Ziadullah, Advocate for
Respondents (in Civil Appeals Nos.128, 129 and 130 of 2013).
SABIR HUSSAIN AND OTHERS
VS
COLLECTOR LAND ACQUISITION UPRAISING MANGLA DAM PROJECT, MIRPUR AND OTHERS
Law:
Section:
(a) Land Acquisition Act (I of 1894)--- ----Ss. 18 & 4---Reference to court---Enhancement of compensation---Market value---Determination of---Procedure---Referee Judge enhanced compensation price to the extent of Rs.100,000/- Banjer Qadeem, Rs.75,000/- Ghair Mumkin Rs.5,50,000/- for Ghair Mumkin School, per kanal along with 15% compulsory acquisition charges---Validity---Collector Land Acquisition had himself observed that the prices of the land in the village were much higher and people were ready to pay maximum price which any one could demand---Compensation assessed by the Collector Land Acquisition appeared to be erroneous---Market value of the land had to be determined keeping in view not only the sale deeds registered during the period of one year before the issuance of notification under S.4 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 but also the sale deeds registered after issuance of the said notification---Market value of the land should not be valued merely by reference to the use for which it was being acquired at the relevant time but also the use to which it could reasonably be put in future---Referee Judge as well as the High Court had not considered the evidence properly which was misreading and non-reading of evidence---Market value of the land was such price on which the owner of the same was ready to sell and willing buyer was ready to purchase---Supreme Court observed that Referee Judge as well as the High Court should have considered the oral evidence and sale deeds to determine that acquired land could be utilized for residential and commercial purpose---Landowners were entitled to the compensation at the rate of Rs.10,00,000/- per kanal irrespective of the land, with 15% compulsory acquisition charges---Appeal was allowed accordingly. Ejaz Ahmed Mir v. Collector Land Acquisition and 3 others 2013 SCR 603; Abdul Aziz v. Azad Government and 2 others PLD 2010 SC (AJ&K) 37; Maqsood Bibi and 6 others v. Collector Land Acquisition, Mangla Dam Raising Project Mirpur (Zone-I) and 2 others 2013 SCR 973 and Land Acquisition Collector, Sargodha and another v. Muhammad Sultan and another PLD 2014 SC 696 ref. Marawat Khan and 4 others v. Collector Land…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492