Sections 4, 18 and 23 (2) of the land collector awarded the land compensation award but the landlord did not receive the award from the tree compensation amount as the aforesaid award was awarded to the referee court under section 18 of the acquisition of land. Referred. The Act, 1894, the referee court fixed a compensation of Rs. 6382 per kanal for most possible ruin land and Rs. 9060 per kanal for the motherland, even when the land value for the motherland was Rs. The canal and arid ancient accuracy document should be Rs. 24236 per canal from which the authorities have prepared the average value of the motherland land at Rs. 11851 and arid arrears of Rs. 24236 per canal. Applying refusal to approve compensation for damages to the trees may have been a straightforward payment and not all The referendum court had erroneously found that the disputed transaction of sale of the disputed land for residential purpose was obtained for the construction of the controversial land dam while the landlords were compensated for the low utilization of their land. The referee's court finding where the compensation was not paid was not sustainable The High Court allowed the landlord's appeal and excluded the one filed by the authorities. Declaration of the market value of the disputed land as mentioned in the document prepared by the authorities but Rs. 13000 per kanal for Mayara land and Rs. 28000 per kanal for arid ancient and Rs. 36310 as compensation for trees as per share. Given, restrict access to the land and consider the difference in t
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011
