IN THE PESHAWAR HIGH COURT, PESHAWAR. · 2018-12-06 · 1 IN THE PESHAWAR HIGH COURT, PESHAWAR....

1

IINN TTHHEE PPEESSHHAAWWAARR HHIIGGHH CCOOUURRTT,,

PPEESSHHAAWWAARR..

[[JJuuddiicciiaall DDeeppaarrttmmeenntt]]..

Regular First Appeal No.562-P/2014

Qazi Badr-ul-Wahab and others,

Residents of District Mardan.

Appellant (s)

VERSUS

Land Acquisition Collector,

Provincial Housing Authority,

Peshawar and others.

Respondents

For Appellants :- M/S Issac Ali Qazi, M.Tariq Khan

Yousafzai, Gulzar Ahmad Khan and

Farhat Ullah Khan, Advocates.

For Respondents:- M/S Sabah ud Din Khattak, Haji

Fayaz Ali and Furqan Yousafzai,

Advocates.

Date of hearing: 05.11.2018

JUDGMENT

ROOH-UL-AMIN KHAN, J:- The Director General (DG)

Provincial Housing Authority (PHA) being in need of land

in Moza Mera Jalozai Tehsil Pubbi District Nowshera, for

public purpose, namely, “Construction of Housing Scheme

for Govt Servants and General Public” after fulfilling the

requisite formalities in terms of sections 4, 17 (4) (6) and 9

of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (the Act), acquired total

8905 Kanal and 10 Marla land in various Khasra numbers of

said Moza, vide Awards No.10059 to 10065 dated

24.09.2011. The Land Acquisition Collector, on the basis of

one year average worked out by the revenue staff, fixed the

following price of per marla land of different kinds, with

15% compulsory acquisition charges and 6% interest from

the date of acquisition till final payment:-

2

Name of Moza Kind of land Rate of per marla

Jalozai Mera through

notification No.919 /DRO/

Acq dated 29.09.2008

i. Barani

ii. BanjarQadeem

iii. Ghair Mumkin Abadi/

Mohajecamp

Rs.1759.26

Rs.4308.62

Rs.1895.59.

Jalozai Mera

Notification No.66/DOR/


i. Barani

ii. Banjar Qadeem


Mohajer

Camp

iv. Dagoba

v. Abadi

Rs.3411.92

Rs.5625.00

Rs.1330.37

Rs.20,000

Rs.10454.54

The land owners being dissatisfied from the market price

determined by the Collector, filed Reference petitions under

sections 18 and 30 of the Act of 1894 before the learned

ADJ-V/Judge Referee Court, Nowshera on 17.04.2011

claiming therein the actual market price of the acquired land

as Rs.Rs.80,000/- per Marla.

2. When summoned, the respondents Acquiring

Department appeared before the learned Referee Court and

contested the Reference petitions by filing written statement,

raising therein variety of objections, legal as well as factual.

From controversial pleadings of the parties necessary issues

were framed, in support whereof, parties led their respective

evidence and on conclusion of trial, the learned Referee

Court, after hearing both the sides, vide consolidated

judgment dated 03.06.2014, enhanced the market price of the

acquired land as under:-

Name of Moza Kind of land Rate of per marla

Jalozai Mera

Notification No.66/DOR/


i. Barani

ii. Banjar Qadeem

Rs.10,000

3


Mohajer

Camp

iv. Dagoba

v. Abadi

Rs.11,000

Rs.7,000

Rs.32,000

Rs.17000

3. The land-owners still aggrieved from the market

price determined by the learned Referee Court, have

preferred the following Regular First Appeals:-

1.RFA No.324-P/2014

Eman Ud Din.vs. Director General Provincial Housing Authority


2.RFA No.325-P/2014

Risalpur.vs. Director General Provincial Housing Authority


3.RFA No.326-P/2014

Sahib Shah and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing

Authority Peshawar and others.

4.RFA No.327-P/2014

Haji Mohammad Haroon and others.vs. Director General Provincial

Housing Authority Peshawar and others.

5. RFA No.328-P/2014

Shaukat Ali and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


6.RFA No.329-P/2014

Khusdil Khan and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


7.RFA No.330-P/2014

Anar Gul and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


8.RFA No.331-P/2014 Mohib Ullah Khan and others.vs. Director General Provincial


9.RFA No.332-P/2014

Waqif Khan..vs.. Director General Provincial Housing Authority


10.RFA No.333-P/2014

Roshad Khan.vs. Director General Provincial Housing Authority


4

11.RFA No.334-P/2014

Saleh Ud Din.vs. Director General Provincial Housing Authority


12.RFA No.336-P/2014

Shafiq Ahmad and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


13.RFA No.337-P/2014

Irshad Ali Khan and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


14.RFA No.338-P/2014

Tareh Ullah and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


15.RFA No.341-P/2014

Sameer Khan and other ...vs. Director General Provincial Housing


16.RFA No.342-P/2014

Faizan Ul Haq and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


17.RFA No. 343-P/2014

Maim Ullah and others..vs. Director General Provincial Housing


18.RFA No.344-P/2014

Fazal Yazdan.vs. Director General Provincial Housing Authority


19.RFA No.345-P/2014

Haji Saif Ullah and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


20.RFA No.346-P/2014

Nawab Khan.vs. Director General Provincial Housing Authority


21.RFA No.347-P/2014

Bakhtiar and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


22.RFA No.348-P/2014

Zahid Gul and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


23.RFA No. 349-P/2014

Khaista Gul and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


24.RFA No. 350-P/2014

Fazal Kabeer and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


25.RFA No.351-P/2014

Zahid Gul and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


5

26.RFA No. 352-P/2014

Miraj Wali Khan.vs. Director General Provincial Housing Authority


27.RFA No. 353-P/2014

Mst. Zar Pashan Begum and others.vs. Director General Provincial


28.RFA No. 354-P/2014

Ali Haider and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


29.RFA No. 378-P/2014

Zafar Ali and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


30.RFA No.379-P/2014

Nawazish Ali and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


31.RFA No.380-P/2014

Miraj Begum and others..vs.. Director General Provincial Housing


32.RFA No.381-P/2014

Hashmat Khan and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


33.RFA No.382-P/2014

Mohammad Amir Rafique and others.vs. Director General Provincial


34.RFA No.383-P/2014

Mst. Feroza begum and others.vs. Director General Provincial


35.RFA No. 386-P/2014

Ha bib Ur Rehman and others..vs. Director General Provincial


36.RFA No. 388-P/2014

Gul Bahadar and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


37.RFA No.389-P/2014

Saif Ullah and others...vs. Director General Provincial Housing


38.RFA No. 408-P/2014

Aamir Hadier and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


39.RFA No.411-P/2014

Mst. Zaib Un Nisa...vs. Director General Provincial Housing


40.RFA No.412-P/2014

MZst. Shamzhad Pari.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


6

41.RFA No.419-P/2014

Afsar Ali and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


42.RFA No.420-P/2014

Walizar and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


43.RFA No. 422-P/2014

Guldaraz Khan and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


44.RFA No.423-P/2014

Tariq Kamal and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


45.RFA No. 452-P/2014

Kifayat Ali through Legal Heirs and others.vs. Director General

Provincial Housing Authority Peshawar and others.

46.RFA No.453-P/2014

Shah Zaman Khattak and others.vs. Director General Provincial


47.RFA No.455-P/2014

Qazi Atta Ul Haq and others .vs. Director General Provincial


48.RFA No.464-P/2014

Wadan Khan and others .vs. Director General Provincial Housing


49.RFA No.472-P/2014

Saif Ul Malook and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


50.RFA No.474-P/2014

Siraj Gul and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


51.RFA No. 485-P/2014

Dilawar Khan and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


52.RFA No.486-P/2014

Abdul Nawab and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


53.RFA No.487-P/2014

Saida Khan and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


54.RFA No.488-P/2014

Fazal Akbar and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


55.RFA No.492-P/2014

Dost Mohammad and others.vs. District Officer Revenue & Estate/

Collector Land Acquisition Nowshera and others.

7

56.RFA No.493-P/2014

Khalid Zada and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


57.RFA No.504-P/2014

Zuylqadar.vs. Director General Provincial Housing Authority


58.RFA No.511-P/2014

Haji Yousaf Khan and others.vs. Director General Provincial


59.RFA No.517-P/2014

Mohammad Hamayun and others.vs. Director General Provincial


60.RFA No.518-P/2014

Sardar Ali and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


61.RFA No.541-P/2014

Gulzar Ahmad Khan and others.vs. Director General Provincial


62.RFA No.542-P/2014

Shah Nawaz Khan and others.vs. Director General Provincial


63.RFA No.559-P/2014

Taj Umar Ali Khan and others.vs. Director General Provincial


64. RFA No.561-P/2014

Bahkhtiar Ul Haq and others.vs. Director General Provincial


65.RFA No.563-P/2014

Mir Ahmad Khan and others.vs. Director General Provincial


66.RFA No.565-P/2014

Riaz Ul Haq and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


67.RFA No.566-P/2014

Niaz Mohammad and others.vs. Director General Provincial Housing


68.RFA No.87-P/2015.

Lal Zada..vs..Director General Provincial Housing Authority


69.RFA No.200-P/2018

Mst. Natasha and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing

Authority

70.RFA No.572-P/2014

Mohammad Azam Khan…vs…Director General Provincial Housing


8

71.RFA No.321-P/2014

Mohammad Aslam and others..vs..Director General Provincial


72.RFA No.322-P/2014

Muslim Shah and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


73.RFA No.323-P/2014

Hussain Khan and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


74.RFA No.339-P/2014

Zar Ali Khan and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


75.RFA No.340-P/2014

Hameed Ullah and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


76.RFA No.355-P/2014

Biradar Khan..vs..Director General Provincial Housing Authority


77.RFA No.387-P/2014

Shahzada and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


78.RFA No.417-P/2014

Mohammad Qasim Khan and others..vs..Director General Provincial


79.RFA No.421-P/2014

Nizam Ali and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


80.RFA No.424-P/2014

Mst. Saba Gul and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


81.RFA No.426-P/2014

Fida Mohammad and others..vs..Director General Provincial


82.RFA No.428-P/2014

Dildar Khan Khattak..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


83.RFA No.429-P/2014

Fazal Mabood and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


84.RFA No.430-P/2014

Mst. Zahin Pari..vs..Director General Provincial Housing Authority


85. RFA No.431-P/2014

Abdur Rashid..vs..Director General Provincial Housing Authority


9

86. RFA No.432-P/2014

Haji Mohammad Sair Khan and others..vs..Director General

Provincial Housing Authority Peshawar and others.

87.RFA No.433-P/2014

Sardar..vs..Director General Provincial Housing Authority Peshawar

and others.

88. RFA No.434-P/2014

Rowaidar Khan ...vs...Director General Provincial Housing


89. RFA No.435-P/2014

Khalil Jan..vs..Director General Provincial Housing Authority


90. RFA No.436-P/2014

Said Wali Shah and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


91. RFA No.437-P/2014

Haji Azam Khan and others..vs..Director General Provincial


92. RFA No.438-P/2014

Intizar Mohammad and others..vs..Director General Provincial


93. RFA No.439-P/2014

Tafoor Rehman and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


94. RFA No.440-P/2014

Haji Barkat Shah and others..vs..Director General Provincial


95. RFA No.441-P/2014

Pervez Khan and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


96. RFA No.442-P/2014

Muzafar Hussain and others..vs..Director General Provincial


97. RFA No.443-P/2014

Tafoor Rehman and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


98.RFA No.444-P/2014

Sheraz Ahmad and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


99. RFA No.447-P/2014

Ahmad Ali and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


100. RFA No.448-P/2014

Ijaz Ali Khan and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


10

101. RFA No.456-P/2014

Mst. Razia Begum and others..vs..Director General Provincial


102. RFA No.462-P/2014

Fazal Shah..vs..Director General Provincial Housing Authority


103. RFA No.463-P/2014

Noor Ullah and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


104.RFA No.465-P/2014

Naseem Khan and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


105. RFA No.466-P/2014

Sher Man Shah and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


106. RFA No.467-P/2014

Noor ul Baswar and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


107. RFA No.468-P/2014

Farman Gul and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


108. RFA No.469-P/2014

Abdul Mateen..vs..Director General Provincial Housing Authority


109. RFA No.470-P/2014

Fazal-e-Hadi and another..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


110. RFA No.471-P/2014

Nemat Khan and another..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


111. RFA No.473-P/2014

Qazi Wajahat Ullah..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


112. RFA No.475-P/2014

Qaiser Khan and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


113. RFA No.483-P/2014

Malik Sher Bahadar Khan..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


114. RFA No.484-P/2014

Noor Ali Sahib Shah through Legal Heirs and others..vs..Director

General Provincial Housing Authority Peshawar and others.

115. RFA No.490-P/2014

Mst. Gul Baha..vs..Director General Provincial Housing Authority


11

116. RFA No.491-P/2014

Qadar Gul and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


117. RFA No.494-P/2014

Javed Iqbal and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


118. RFA No.495-P/2014

Ajmal Khan and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


119. RFA No.496-P/2014

Abdul Kalam and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


120. RFA No.497-P/2014

Wasil Khan and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


121. RFA No.509-P/2014

Waheed Zaman..vs..Director General Provincial Housing Authority


122. RFA No.510-P/2014

Fazal Khan and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


123. RFA No.515-P/2014

Hanif Khan and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


124. RFA No.516-P/2014

Anwar Ali..vs..Director General Provincial Housing Authority


125. RFA No.519-P/2014

Abdul Manan and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


126. RFA No.526-P/2014

Haq Nawaz and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


127. RFA No.528-P/2014

Ali Haider and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


128. RFA No.538-P/2014

Khaista Rehman and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


129. RFA No.539-P/2014

Habib Ullah and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


130. RFA No.540-P/2014

Hunar Gul and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing

Authority Peshawar and others

.

12

131. RFA No.543-P/2014

Wazir Aslam and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


132. RFA No. 564-P/2014

Faiz Mohammad and others..vs..Director General Provincial


133. RFA No.567-P/2014

Mst. Hussan Zari and others..vs..Director General Provincial


134. RFA No.573-P/2014

Mohammad Zaman and others..vs..Director General Provincial


135. RFA No. 425-P/2014.

Fazlullah and others…vs…Director General Provincial Housing


136. RFA No. 427-P/2014.

Saleem Khan and others…vs…Director General Provincial Housing


137. RFA No. 449-P/2014.

Zarkesh and others…vs…Director General Provincial Housing


138. RFA No. 450-P/2014.

Naeem Shah…vs…Director General Provincial Housing Authority

Peshawar and others

139. RFA No.458-P/2014.

Suleman and others…vs…Director General Provincial Housing


140. RFA No. 583-P/2014.

Director General Provincial Housing Authority Peshawar and

others…vs…Misri Khan and others.

141. RFA No. 586-P/2014.


others…vs…Bakhtiyar Ul Haq and others.

142. RFA No. 589-P/2014.


others…vs…Tajamul Shah and others.

143. RFA No. 605-P/2014.


others…vs…Safeer Ullah and others.

144. RFA No. 608-P/2014.


others…vs…Suleman Shah and others.

145. RFA No. 624-P/2014.


others…vs…Naeem Shah.

13

146. RFA No. 656-P/2014.


others…vs…Qalandar Shah and others.

147. RFA No. 674-P/2014.


others…vs…Zarkesh and others.

148. RFA No. 676-P/2014.


others…vs…Fazal Khan and others.

149. RFA No. 38-P/2014.


others…vs…Muslim Shah.

150. RFA No.454-P/2014

Shahnawaz Khan and others Vs DG PHA, Peshawar.

151. RFA No.335-P/2014

Aminullah etc Vs DG PHA, Peshawar.

152. RFA No.320-P/2014

Mir Fayaz etc vs DG PHA, Peshawar.

153. Oject. Petition No.3-P/2018

In RFA NO.87-P/2015

Lal Zada etc vs DG PHA, Peshawar.

4. The Acquiring Department-respondents have also

assailed the judgment of the learned Referee Court in the

following connected RFAs, seeking reduction of the market

price to the one determined by the Land Acquisition

Collector in the Awards.

1. RFA No.574-P/2014


others..vs..Mst. Zahin Pari.

2. RFA No.575-P/2014


others..vs..Safdar Ali.

3. RFA No.576-P/2014


others..vs..Muzafar Hussain and others.

4. RFA No.578-P/2014


others..vs..Taj Mohammad and others.

5. RFA No.579-P/2014


others..vs..Anar Gul.

6. RFA No.580-P/2014


others..vs..Waqif Khan.

14

7. RFA No.582-P/2014


others..vs..Shah Saud.

8. RFA No.588-P/2014


others..vs..Waqif Khan.

9. RFA No.590-P/2014


others..vs..Ali Gul and others.

10. RFA No.591-P/2014


others..vs..Ali Haider.

11. RFA No.593-P/2014


others..vs..Riaz Ul Haq and others.

12. RFA No.594-P/2014


others..vs..Jan Alam and others.

13. RFA No.595-P/2014


others..vs..Dost Mohammad and others.

14.RFA No.596-P/2014


others..vs..Qazi Badr Ul Wahab and others.

15. RFA No.597-P/2014


others..vs..Farhat Ullah and others.

16. RFA No.599-P/2014


others..vs..Mohammad Amar Rafiq and others.

17. RFA No.600-P/2014


others..vs..Mst. Bibi Gul Pari and others.

18. RFA No.609-P/2014


others..vs..Sameer and others.

19. RFA No.610-P/2014


others..vs..Haq Nawaz and others.

20. RFA No.612-P/2014


others..vs..Roshan Khan and others.

21. RFA No.614-P/2014


others..vs..Hussan Ara and others.

15

22. RFA No.615-P/2014


others..vs..Mst. Shamshad Pari and others.

23. RFA No.616-P/2014


others..vs..Saif Ul Malook and others.

24.RFA No.617-P/2014


others..vs..Gul Bahadar and others.

25. RFA No.618-P/2014


others..vs..Awal Khan and others.

26.RFA No.619-P/2014


others..vs..Bukhtar Ul Haq.

27. RFA No.620-P/2014


others..vs..Khushdil Khan and others.

28. RFA No.621-P/2014


others..vs..Widan Khan and others.

29. RFA No.622-P/2014


others..vs..Habib Ullah and others.

30. RFA No.623-P/2014


others..vs..Khaista Rehman and others.

31. RFA No.627-P/2014


others..vs..Fazal Yazdan.

32. SRFA No.628-P/2014


others..vs..Shams Ul Haq and others.

33. RFA No.629-P/2014


others..vs..Faizan Ul Haq and others.

34. RFA No.632-P/2014


others..vs..Fazal Kabeer and others.

35. RFA No.637-P/2014


others..vs..Shafiq Ahmad and others.

36. RFA No.640-P/2014


others..vs..Imad Ud Din.

16

37. RFA No.642-P/2014


others..vs..Mst. Misal Ul Nihar and others.

38. RFA No.643-P/2014


others..vs..Nawazish Ali and others.

39. RFA No.648-P/2014


others..vs..Dil Nawaz Khan and others.

40.RFA No.649-P/2014


others..vs..Mst. Miraj Behum and others.

41. RFA No.650-P/2014


others..vs..Mohammad Nawaz and others.

42.RFA No.651-P/2014


others..vs..Haji Saif Ullah and others.

43. RFA No.652-P/2014


others..vs..Shams Ur Rehman and others.

44. RFA No.657-P/2014 and others..vs..Inam Gul and others.

45. RFA No.661-P/2014


others..vs..Tariq Ahmad and others.

46. RFA No.662-P/2014


others..vs..Mst. Zaib Un Nisa.

47. RFA No.670-P/2014


others..vs..Afsar Ali and others.

48. RFA No.671-P/2014


others..vs..Raj Mohammad and others.

49. RFA No.672-P/2014


others..vs..Mohammad Qasim Khan and others.

50.RFA No.673-P/2014


others..vs..Khalid Zada and others.

51.RFA No.677-P/2014


others..vs..Mst. Hussan Ara.

17

52. RFA No.4-P/2015

Tariq Ahmad and others…vs…Director General Provincial Housing


53. RFA No.6-P/2015


others…vs…Qazi Atta Ul Haq.

54. RFA No.9-P/2015


others…vs…Gulistan Khan and others.

55. RFA No.10-P/2015


others…vs…Mst. Misal Un Nihar and others.

56. RFA No.15-P/2015


others…vs… Mst. Razia Begum and others.

57. RFA No.17-P/2015


others…vs…Haji Hussain Ahmad Khattak and others.

58. RFA No.20-P/2015


others…vs…Aamir Haider and others.

59. RFA No.21-P/2015


others…vs…Sajida.

60. RFA No.24-P/2015


others…vs…Faiz Mohammad and others.

61. RFA No.26-P/2015


others…vs…Zafar and others.

62. RFA No.27-P/2015


others…vs…Gul Daraz Khan and others.

63. RFA No.28-P/2015


others…vs…Qazi Wajahat Ullah and others.

64.RFA No.29-P/2015


others…vs…Qazi Mehr Ul Wahab Khan and others.

65. RFA No. 30-P/2015


others…vs…Akhtar Hussain and others.

66. RFA No.31-P/2015


others…vs…Taj Umar Ali Khan and others.

18

67. RFA No.34-P/2015


others…vs…Zarafat Sair.

68.RFA No.36-P/2015


others…vs…Gulzar Ahmad Khan and others.

69. RFA No.37-P/2015


others…vs…Zulqadar.

70. RFA No.66-P/2015

Naeem Khan and another..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


71. RFA No.83-P/2015


others…vs…Kifayat Ali and others.

72. RFA No.84-P/2015


others…vs…Rab Nawaz and others.

73. RFA No.85-P/2015


others…vs…Mst. Shah Paristan.

74. RFA No.86-P/2015


others…vs…Shad Mohammad and others.

75. RFA No.87-P/2015


others…vs…Lal Zada and others.

76. RFA No.88-P/2015


others…vs…Shah Nawaz Khan and others.

77. RFA No.89-P/2015


others…vs…Fazal e Akbar and others.

78. RFA No.92-P/2015


others…vs…Hashmat Khan and others.

79.RFA No.93-P/2015


others…vs…Mohammad Nawaz and others.

80. RFA No.94-P/2015


others…vs…Mohammad Hamayun and others.

81. RFA No.95-P/2015


others…vs…Shah Nawaz and others.

82. RFA No.98-P/2015

19


others…vs…Salah Ud Din and others.

83. RFA No.99-P/2015


others…vs…Farhat Ullah Khan.

84. RFA No.100-P/2015


others…vs…Haji Mohib Ullah.

85. RFA No.101-P/2015


others…vs…Sahib Shah.

86. RFA No.102-P/2015


others…vs…Tariq Ahmad and others.

87. RFA No.103-P/2015


others…vs…Mst. Tilat and others.

88. RFA No.104-P/2015


others…vs…Khalid Zada and others.

89. RFA No.105-P/2015


others…vs…Siraj Gul and others.

90. RFA No.107-P/2015


others…vs…Zahid Gul and others.

91. RFA No.108-P/2015


others…vs…Habib Ur Rehman and others.

92. RFA No.109-P/2015


others…vs…Haji Mohammad Harooan and others.

93. RFA No.110-P/2015


others…vs…Wazir Aslam and others.

94. RFA No.112-P/2015


others…vs…Naqeeb Khan and others.

95. RFA No.113-P/2015


others…vs…Hussan Ara.

96. RFA No.146-P/2015


others…vs…Shah Zaman Khattak and others.

20

97. RFA No.148-P/2015


others…vs…Farman Gul and others.

98.. RFA No.151-P/2015


others…vs…Hasim Ali Khan and others.

99. RFA No.156-P/2015


others…vs…Miraj Begum and others.

100. RFA No.158-P/2015


others…vs…Mst. Amna Begum.

101. RFA No.160-P/2015


others…vs…Qazi Mohammad.

102. RFA No.634-P/2014


others..vs..Fazal Mohammad and another.

103. RFA No.635-P/2014


others..vs..Naseeb Gul and others.

104. RFA No.647-P/2014 Director General Provincial Housing Authority Peshawar and

others..vs..Noor Rehman and others.

105. RFA No.668-P/2014


others..vs..Niaz Ullah.

106. RFA No.669-P/2014


others..vs..Nemat Khan.

107. RFA No.90-P/2015


others..vs..Mst. Shahtari and others.

108. RFA No.654-P/2014


others..vs..Dr. Saif Ullah and others.

109. RFA No.106-P/2015


others..vs..Najeeb Ullah and others.

110. RFA No. 149-P/2015.


others..vs..Mukhtyar Ul Haq and others.

111. RFA No.577-P/2014


others…vs…Duran Shah and others.

21

112. RFA No.581-P/2014


others…vs…Fazal Ullah

113. RFA No.584-P/2014


others…vs…Pervez Khan and others.

114. RFA No.585-P/2014


others…vs…Intizar Mohammad and others.

115.RFA No.587-P/2014


others…vs…Haji Hazrat Akbar and others.

116. RFA No.592-P/2014


others…vs…Haji Mohammad Yousaf and others.

117. RFA No.598-P/2014 Director General Provincial Housing Authority Peshawar and

others…vs…Rowaidad Khan and others.

118.RFA No.602-P/2014


others…vs…Mst; Gul Baha

119. RFA No.603-P/2014


others…vs…Hameed Khan and others.

120.RFA No.604-P/2014


others…vs…Sher Alam and others.

121. RFA No.606-P/2014


others…vs…Waheed Zaman and others.

122. RFA No.607-P/2014


others…vs…Mst. Maqsood Begum.

123. RFA No.611-P/2014


others…vs…Haji Barkat Shah and others.

124. RFA No.613-P/2014


others…vs…Mir Wali Khan and others.

125.RFA No.625-P/2014


others…vs…Haq Nawaz and others.

126.RFA No.626-P/2014


others…vs…Mohammad Iqbal and others.

22

127. RFA No.630-P/2014


others…vs…Ajmal Khan and others.

128. RFA No.633-P/2014


others…vs…Saleem Khan and others.

129. RFA No.636-P/2014


others…vs…Noor Ali and others.

130. RFA No.638-P/2014


others…vs…Fazal Mahboob and others.

131. RFA No.639-P/2014


others…vs…Afsar Ullah and others.

132. RFA No.641-P/2014


others…vs…Shahzada and others.

133. RFA No.644-P/2014


others…vs…Misri Khan.

134. RFA No.645-P/2014


others…vs…Minhaj Ali and others.

135. RFA No.646-P/2014


others…vs…Mst. Hussan Zari.

136. RFA No.653-P/2014


others…vs…Nemat Ullah and others.

137. RFA No.655-P/2014


others…vs…Nisar Ahmad and others.

138. RFA No.658-P/2014


others…vs…Bismillah Shah and others.

139. RFA No.659-P/2014


others…vs…Fazal e Hadi and others.

140. RFA No.660-P/2014


others…vs…Gul Mohammad and others.

141. RFA No.664-P/2014


others…vs…Haji Mohammad and others.

23

142. RFA No.665-P/2014


others…vs…Noor Ullah and others.

143. RFA No.667-P/2014


others…vs…Fazal Shah and others.

144. RFA No.675-P/2014


others…vs…Abdul Manan and others.

145. RFA No.7-P/2015


others…vs…Shaukat Ali and others.

146. RFA No.8-P/2015


others…vs…Zulfiqar Ali and others.

147. RFA No.11-P/2015


others…vs…Fida Mohammad and others.

148. RFA No.12-P/2015


others…vs…Shahzada and others.

149. RFA No.13-P/2015


others…vs…Javed Iqbal and others.

150. RFA No.14-P/2015


others…vs…Fazal Mehbood and others.

151. RFA No.16-P/2015


others…vs…Biradar Khan and another.

152. RFA No.18-P/2015


others…vs…Olas Khan and others.

153. RFA No.19-P/2015


others…vs…Hunar Gul and others.

154. RFA No.22-P/2015


others…vs…Ahsan Gul and others.

155. RFA No.25-P/2015


others…vs…Qaiser Khan and others.

156. RFA No.32-P/2015


others…vs…Hussain Khan and others.

24

157. RFA No.33-P/2015


others…vs…Haji Azam Khan and others.

158. RFA No.35-P/2015


others…vs…Abdul Mateen and others.

159. RFA No.54-P/2015

Shaukat Ali alias Shaukat Khan ..vs.. Director General Provincial


160. RFA No.67-P/2015

Ahsan Gul and others..vs.. Director General Provincial Housing


161. RFA No.91-P/2015


others...vs…Niaz Muhammad and others.

162. RFA No.96-P/2015


others...vs…Mohammad Arshad and others.

163. RFA No.97-P/2015


others...vs…Mir Ahmad Khan.

164. RFA No.111-P/2015


others...vs…Shaukat Ali and others.

165. RFA No.147-P/2015


others...vs…Hazrat Akbar and others.

166. RFA No.150-P/2015


others...vs…Malak Sher Bahadar.

167. RFA No.152-P/2015


others...vs…Khalil Jan.

168. RFA No.153-P/2015


others...vs…Dildar Khan Khattak and others.

169. RFA No.154-P/2015


others...vs…Noor Ul Basar and others.

170. RFA No.155-P/2015


others...vs…Anwar Ali.

171. RFA No.157-P/2015


others...vs…Nawab Khan.

25

172. RFA No.159-P/2015


others...vs…Naeem Shah.

173. RFA No.161-P/2015


others...vs…Hanif Ullah and others.

174. RFA No.162-P/2015


others...vs…Mohammad Zaman.

175. RFA No.376-P/2015


others...vs…Mst. Natasha and others.

176. RFA No.23-P/2015


others...vs…Malik Zain Ul Abideen and others.

177. RFA No.512-P/2014

Malik Zain Ul Abideen..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


178.RFA No.527-P/2014

Nizam Khan and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


179. RFA No.560-P/2014

Noor Rehman and others..vs..Director General Provincial Housing


180. RFA No.663-P/2014

DG PHA Vs Hameed Ullah etc.

181.RFA No.666-P/2016

DG PHA Vs Mst. Zaid un Nisa.

5. Since, appeals filed by the parties, pertain to the

Awards announced in one and the same Moza whereby land

has been acquired for the same purpose as well as the

Reference petitions of all the land owners have been decided

through a consolidated judgment, therefore, are being

decided through this single judgment.

6. Arguments of learned counsel for the parties heard

and record perused with their able assistance.

7. Before adverting to the issue of determination of

actual market price of the acquired land, I, would like to

meet the preliminary legal objection, raised by the learned

counsel for the respondents department to the effect that

26

Reference Petitions filed by the land owners under section

18 of the Act of 1894, were not competent as the

landowners had received the compensation amount of the

acquired land without any protest, as such they had no

locus standi to file reference petitions under section 18 of

read with second proviso to sub-section (2) of section 31 of

the Act of 1894.

8. In context of the above legal objection, record of

the case, particularly, acquaintance role (Qabz ul Wasool)

was perused, which revealed that some of the land owners

had received compensation underwritten protest, while

some without any written protest. It is manifest from

record that almost all the reference petitions have been

filed by the land owners prior to receipt of the

compensation amount, which by itself amounts to protest

within the meaning of proviso to sub-section (2) of section

31 of the Act of 1894. Most importantly; reading of entire

section 31 of the Act of 1894, would reveal that it does not

mandate “any written protest”, therefore, legal force and

applicability of objection of the learned counsel for the

respondents department can be adjudged on the touch

stone of the above mentioned consideration, for which

resort to section 31 of the Act of 1894, would be

advantageous, which runs as follow:-

31. Payment of compensation or deposit of the

same in Court.— (1):- On making an award under

section 11, the Collector shall tender payment of the

compensation awarded by him to the persons

interested entitled thereto according to the award, and

shall pay it to them unless prevented by some one or

more of the contingencies mentioned in the next sub-

section.

(2) If they shall not consent to receive it, or if there

be no person competent to alienate the land, or if

there by any dispute as to the title to receive the

compensation or as to the apportionment of it, the

Collector shall deposit the amount of the

compensation in the Court to which a reference

under section 18 would be submitted.

Provided that any person admitted to be

interested may receive such payment under protest as

to the sufficiency of the amount.

27

Provided also that no person who has

received the amount otherwise than under protest

shall be entitled to make any application under

section 18.

Provided also that nothing herein contained

shall affect the liability of any person, who may

receive the whole or any part of any compensation

awarded under this Act, to pay the same to the

person lawfully entitled thereto.

(3) Notwithstanding anything in this section the

Collector may, with the sanction of the Provincial

Government, instead of awarding a money

compensation in respect of any land, make any

arrangement with person having a limited interest in

such land, either by the grant of other lands in

exchange, the remission of land-revenue on other

lands held under the same title, or in such other way

as may be equitable having regard to the interest of

the parties concerned.

(4) Nothing in the last foregoing sub-section shall be

construed to interfere with, or limit the power of the

Collector to enter into any arrangement with any

person interested in the land and competent to

contact in respect thereof.” (The Underlines

supplied for emphasis).

Proviso (2) to section 31 of the Act of 1894, implies a bar

on a person to file reference under section 18, who has

received the amount of compensation otherwise than under

protest. However, the above quoted proviso does not

provide any mechanism for making or lodging such

protest, at the time or before receiving the compensation. It

does not say that protest by a claimant must necessarily be

in writing. According to section 18, reference can be

sought by (i) any person interested who has not accepted

the award (2) by a written application made to the

Collector (3) for determination as regards objection to the

land, the amount of compensation and the person to whom

it is payable. Result of the conjecture reading of section 18

and proviso to sub-section (2) of section 31 of the Act,

manifestly state that an application seeking reference under

section 18 of the Act of 1894, for determination of the

amount of compensation, can be made by any person

interested who has not accepted the award and who has not

28

received the amount otherwise than under protest. Though,

second proviso to sub-section (2) of section 31 of the Act,

is couched in the negative form and it disable a person

from seeking reference under section 18, in case the

amount of compensation is received otherwise than under

protest, however, as observed above, the Act of 1894,

nowhere lays down the method, manner and form in which

protest has to be recorded by a person receiving the

compensation. In the process of acquisition, section 9 of

the Act, imposes a duty on the Collector to invite land

owners to put their claims for compensation of their

respective interests and their objections with regard to

measurement of the acquired land under section 8 of the

Act. Similarly, under section 9 (5) of the Act, the Collector

shall also serve notice of enquiry to be held under section

11 of the Act. Provisions of section 11 of the Act are

mandatory in nature and the Collector or the Acquisition

Officer, is personally responsible for conducting such

enquiry. Being final stage of acquisition by Collector, in

pursuance of the notice under section 9 (5) of the Act, the

Collector has to hold enquiry with regard to measurement

of land; the compensation of the land under acquisition and

apportionment of the compensation amount. For invoking

the penal consequences of proviso to sub-section (2) of

section 31, person who is alleged to have received the

amount of compensation without protest would be one who

knew the implication of Award under section 11 of the Act

and that he had a right to claim higher compensation and

seek reference to a Competent Authority/the Court. Yet,

there is another aspect of the case that proviso to

sub-section (2) of section 31 being in nature of estopple,

barred the person raising such plea to establish before the

Court necessary facts on which the rule of estopple is to be

applied, but in this case, an iota of evidence is not brought

29

on record suggestive of the fact that the compensation was

not received by the land owners under protest. In absence

of any express statement by the land owners qua accepting

the award or accepting the amount of compensation

without protest, but applications have been made by them

under section 18 of the Act with promptitude which shall

be deemed as implied protest. I have noted that in

acquisition cases, invariably persons interested are those

who are rustic, illiterate and poor villagers’ agriculturists

or pardhanasheen ladies. In such a situation, the Collector

is under legal obligation to apprise the persons interested

of their right to have determined the amount of

compensation by the Referee Court, in case they are not

satisfied by the amount of compensation determined by the

collector in the award. In the event of not exercising their

right and agreeing to accept the award or amount without

protest, an express acknowledgment must be obtained. In

the case in hand, I have no hesitation to hold that the land

owners, even in absence of express protest at the time of

receiving compensation, are entitled to file reference under

section 18 (1) of the Act of 1894, as all most all the

reference petitions, have been filed before receipt of

compensation amount, which by itself is the best way to

show the intention of the claimants to have accepted the

money under protest. On the other hand, the award is silent

about causing notice under section 9 and 9 (5) of the Act of

1894, much less about observing the mandatory provisions

of section 11 with regard to making enquiry by the

Collector.

9. In view of the above discourse it is held that since

proviso to sub-section (2) of section 31 as well as the

entire Act of 1894, does not provide any particular mode,

manner and method of protest by a claimant at the time of

receipt of amount of compensation, awarded under section

30

11 of the Act of 1894, hence, the protest can be made

either in writing or through file reference under section 18

of the Act of 1894 within prescribed period of limitation. It

is to be kept in mind that for interpretation of Statute there

are settled rules/principles some of which are old as Hills

are and one of such principles is that the Statute be

interpreted in a manner to advance the cause of justice by

making it workable, practicable and harmonious so that

mischief is avoided as for as possible. Such interpretation

would also make the system of justice to sail smoothly

without any unnecessary obstruction. Keeping in mind the

aforesaid principle of interpretation of Statute and going to

the provision quoted above, the claimant may receive the

amount of compensation under protest orally and the oral

protest while receiving the compensation shall not

disentitle the claimant from making any application for

reference under section 18 of the Act of 1894.

10. In this case, on court direction Register Qabz-ul-

Wasool was produced by the respondents, perusal of which

reveals that some of the land owners have received the

amount/compensation underwritten protest while some

without any written protest. No date has been mentioned in

the Register as to on which date the amount had been

received by the land owners. However, learned counsel for

the respondents admitted that the amount of compensation

is being received by the land owners after making the

Reference and some during pendency of the instant appeal

while some have even not yet received the same. One

thing which does appeal to a prudent mind is that if the

land owners had no objection over the compensation and

they have received the compensation without any written

protest, then question arises as to why they have

questioned the Awards by filing Reference petitions on

17.04.2011 well within the stipulated period of issuance of

31

notice under section 12 sub-section (2) of the Act, as

provided under section 18 of the Act ibid. The Awards had

been announced on 24.09.2011. Filing of Reference

Petitions by the land owners on 17.04.2011 is sufficient

proof of their implied protest against the market price

determined by the collector. So it would not make any

difference that the land owners had not mentioned their

written protest on the Register (Qaz-ul-Wasool). Besides,

when the law does not prescribes any particular mode of

protest then the oral protest or reference petition in my

opinion, is a valid protest under law and would be

sufficient to entitle the land owner to file reference petition

under section 18 of the Act of 1894.

11. Yet there is another aspect that some of the land

owners have received the amount under protest and if this

Court treat their reference petitions competent and reaches

to a certain conclusion that would have strong bearing on

the status of the land owners who have not made written

protest as under Article 25 of the Constitution alike shall

be treated alike. In this view of the matter, the land owners

who have not made written protest shall also be entitled to

the same relief. Moreover, the land owners have received

the amount after filing of the reference petitions and the

reference petitions wherein the Awards have been

questioned are sufficient proof of their protest. In view of

the above, the legal objection agitated by learned counsel

for the respondents department is hereby turned down.

12. Coming to merits of the case, the respondents

department has not questioned title of the land owners with

regard to land compulsorily acquired from their

possession, therefore, the only question for determination

is what should be the fair market price payable to land

owners by the acquiring Department. It appears from the

Awards that market price of the acquired lands has been

32

assessed and determined by the Land Acquisition Collector

on the sole criteria of one year average and this fact has

also been categorically mentioned in the Awards.

Admittedly, exercise of determination of market price of

the land on the basis of one year average is squarely

against the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme

Court in case of “Murad Khan through his widow and

13 others Vs Land Acquisition Collector, Peshawar

(1999 SCMR 1647), wherein it has been held that one year

average cannot be the sole criteria for determination of

market value, rather material available on file would be

quite relevant to evaluate the amount of compensation. The

Hon’ble apex Court has emphasized that the best method

to work out the market value is the practical method of

prudent mind laid down under Article 2 of the Qanun-e-

Shahadat Order, i.e. to examine and analyze all the

material and evidence available on the point and

determination of price which a willing purchaser would

pay to the willing seller.

13. Though, expression “market value” has not been

defined by Act of 1894, however, in Abdul Waheed’s

case (1986 MLD 381), it has defined and interpreted by

the Hon’ble apex Court, in the following words:-

“Phrase “market Value” of the land as used in section

23 (A) of the Act means “value to the Owner” and

therefore, such value must be the basis for

determination of compensation. The standard must be

not, subjective standard but an objective one.

Ordinarily, the objective standard would be the price

but owner willing and not obliged to sell might

reasonably expect to obtain from a willing purchaser.

The property must be valued not only with reference to

its condition at the time of the determination but its

potential value must be taken into consideration.”

33

14. In support of their claim, the land owners produced

Patwari Halqa Mera Jalozai as PW.1, who produced Fard

Jamabandi (Exh.PW.1/1) for the year 2009-2010, in

respect of Khasra numbers mentioned in the Awards.

According to aforesaid revenue record the nature of the

acquired land at the time of acquisition was Banjar

Qadeem, Barani, Ghair Mumkin Abadi/Mohajer Camp,

Dagoba and Abadi. PW.1 also produced Naqsha Tasweeri

(Exh.PW.1/2). Moharrir Sub-Registrar, Nowshera

appeared while appearing as PW.2 produced No.470 Bahi

No.1, volume No.236 attested on 19.07.2005

(Exh.PW.2/1), according to which one Mst. Shah Paristan

has sold 01 Kanal and 10 Marlas land against sale

consideration of Rs.9,00,000/- in Moza Jalozai in Khasra

No.470. Assistant District Kanoongo while appearing as

PW.3, produced mutations No.5173, 5174, 5175 attested

on 25.03.2008, mutations No.5185 and 5186 attested on

28.03.2008, mutation No.5225 attested on 06.05.2008,

mutations 5241, 5249, 5276, 5303/1 attested on

22.08.2008, mutations 5329, 5330 attested on 09.09.2008,

mutation No.5143 attested on 22.02.2008, mutations 5342,

5343 attested on 19.09.2008, mutation 5248 attested on

20.05.2008 (Exh.PW.3/1 to Exh.PW.3/16). Collector Land

Acquisition Provincial, Housing Authority, KPK, while

appearing as PW.4 produced the impugned Awards which

are Exh.PW.4/1 (09 pages).

15. The land owners while appearing in the witness

box deposed that price of the acquired land fixed by the

Collector Land Acquisition PHA, is much less than the

actual market price of the lands in the same Moza. They

deposed that in fact their lands were of high potential and

commercial in nature, surrounded by metal pubbi Cherat

road, Warsak Gravity Canal, Engineering University,

Industrial Estate Jalozai and Science & Technology Park

34

Jalozai and due to development and improvements by

various Departments in the vicinity, value of the acquired

had been raised to high level and at the time of Award its

market price was not less than Rs.1,00,000/- per marla.

16. In rebuttal Patwari Halqa Mera Jalozai was

produced, whose statement was recorded as RW.1. He

produced one year average since 15.03.2008 to 15.03.2009

and mutations attested during this period. According to

him the price of the land was determined on the basis of

said mutations/transactions struck. The land Acquisition

Collector appeared as RW.2. He deposed that after

fulfilling all legal requirements and considering the nature

of the lands and revenue record the Awards were

announced.

17. To ascertain the exact location, potentiality and

future prospect of the acquired land for the purpose of

assessment of the fair market value, a penal of Advocates,

namely, Kifayat Ali, Aftab Khan, Arshad Samad and Mr.

Shah Nofal Advocates were appointed as local

commission. They visited the spot and submitted report as

Exh.CW.1/1. According to report commission, the

acquired land is located at some distance from Cherat road

and main GT road surrounded by University of

Engineering and Technology, proposed Abdul Wali Khan

University, ISI colony as well as other private colonies and

shops. Besides, Mohajir Camp was established on the

acquired lands where IDPs used to so civic facilities like

electricity, telecommunication, Sui Gas and mobile phone

Towers were available in the vicinity of the acquired land.

The evidence of the land owners and statement of local

commission with regard to availability of the civic

facilities and higher potentiality of the acquired land, has

not been shattered by the respondents.

35

18. Besides, the land had been acquired by the

Provincial Housing Authority for Housing Scheme for

government employees and general public. The

respondents have prepared Broacher/catalogue and

published the same. The land owners in their evidence

have produced Broacher as Exh.PW.5/2 wherein price of

25 x 54 feet land has been fixed as Rs.5,92,000/-. Though

this fact cannot be ignored that the Provincial Housing

Authority has invested a huge amount on development of

the acquired land and would invest more in the future for

its further development but the price fixed in the Broacher

is also one of the relevant factor to be kept in mind while

determining the market price of the acquired land. The

price of the acquired land has been determined by the land

Collector on the basis of mutations/transaction struck in

the year i.e. 2008-2009. This court is also mindful of the

fact that in sale transaction people do mention less prices

in mutations so as to avoid payment of taxes. Besides, the

District Officer Revenue Nowshera has also issued revised

valuation table vide notification dated 03.07.2009, for the

purpose of stamp duty/mutation fee/registration fee

wherein in Moza Jalozai Mera, rate of per marla Barani

land is Rs.8000/-, Banjar Qadeem Rs.7000/-, Gher

Mumkin Abadi Rs.7000/- Dagoba Rs.7000/- and Abadi

Rs.6000/-. Jahan Shah ADK Nowshera (CW.5), has

admitted aforesaid valuable for the year 2009 to 2011.

Admittedly, the award has been finally announced in the

year 2011. So the rate mentioned in the aforesaid

notification, if taken into consideration, then admittedly,

the market price of the acquired land has not been properly

assessed by the Collector. Sufficient evidence is available

on file to prove that the acquired land is situated in mid of

main GT and Cherat roads. On either side of the road,

shops are located. The acquired land is surrounded by

36

Universities, ISI Office and Housing Societies which fact

has not been rebutted by the respondents. It has been

admitted by the respondents in their evidence that Afghan

Refugee camp was established on the acquired land since

1979 till 2007 and due to this reason no sale transaction

was effected during this period. The respondents have

further admitted existence of Cherat road and Universities

namely, Abdul Waki Khan University and proposed

University of Science and Technology adjacent to the

acquired land.

19. Above all, in this case notification under section 4

of the Act of 1894, was initially issued on 29.09.2008. The

same notification was then issued for the second time on

16.03.2009, whereas the Awards were announced on

24.09.2011 i.e. after about 03 years. The price mentioned

in the aforesaid two notifications is different. In the second

notification the proposed price is high than the first

notification, meaning thereby that with the passage of time,

the market price of the acquired land has exceeded almost

to double. In this view of the matter escalation in the price

of rate during such time is an admitted factor.

20. The learned Referee Court while taking into

consideration the available evidence led by the parties

coupled with all relevant factors necessary for

determination of the fair market price as well as the second

notification wherein escalation prices of land has been

shown after passage of time, has rightly determined the

market price of the acquired land as follow:-

Barani Rs.10,000/- per marla.

Banjar Qadeem Rs.11,000/- per marla

Gher Mumkin Abadi Rs.7,000/- per marla

Dagoba Rs.32000/- per marla

Abadi Rs.17,000/- Per marla

The impugned judgment being well reasoned and based on

proper appreciation of evidence and law on the subject

37

settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court, is not open to any

interference by this Court.

21. Resultantly, the appeals of the parties, being

devoid of force are hereby dismissed.

Announced:

05.11.2018 Siraj Afridi P.S.

JUDGE

SB of Mr. Justice Rooh ul Amin Khan

IN THE PESHAWAR HIGH COURT, PESHAWAR. · 2018-12-06 · 1 IN THE PESHAWAR HIGH COURT, PESHAWAR....

Documents

Transcript of IN THE PESHAWAR HIGH COURT, PESHAWAR. · 2018-12-06 · 1 IN THE PESHAWAR HIGH COURT, PESHAWAR....