GOVERNMENT OF N.-W.F.P. THROUGH SECRETARY BOARD OF REVENUE, N.-W.F.P., PESHAWAR versus SHAH SAID
Section 4, 11, 18 and 54 Determination of Compensation for Land Acquisition Court Reference to Compensation Dissatisfaction Dissatisfied with Determination of Appointment of Collector Collector, Objection filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 The objection was submitted to the referee court, and the referee court increased the amount of compensation and reached the referee's court's order, before the referee court, the respondents, as a party to the request. Requested to be implemented, as they claimed to be the beneficiary of the Acquisition Collector's Award, which was dismissed. Despite the rejection of the application, when the landlords began implementing their decree for the increased amount of compensation, the respondents again filed a petition in which they were requested to pay the increased compensation amount as well. The court also seized it. Amy proceeded to accept the plea, but in the most admirable way in which matters were presented and evidence was recorded, the Trinity Trial Court passed the unanimous decision without looking into the matters involved. In the presence of evidence, such a decision will hardly meet the needs of a decision. The trial court judge was legally required to examine the evidence and under it also the relevant provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which allowed undesirable decisions passed by the trial court. , Which was set aside by the High Court and moved by the applicants. Increase their land on the strength of the decision passed in favor of these houses
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2010
