WAPDA THROUGH CHIEF ENGINEER, MANGLA DAM RAISING PROJECT MIRPUR versus INHABITANT OF BOHA THROUGH FAZAL ELLAHI
Section 18 and 4 Increase in the reference to the acquisition of land with reference to the court, the referee judge paid Rs. 5,55,000 in heels, Rs. 5,00,000 in mine, Rs. For a possible population of up to Rs.6,60,000, increase per capita as well as about 15 acquisition mandatory acquisition compensation. Accuracy Collector Land Acquisition relied on sales actions within a year prior to the issuance of the notification while the acquired land had to be considered while it had a record to ascertain its market value. Was not available. The acquired land was located near a roadside or inhabited area. No material was in the record that it was said that the land sold is similar to the land in which the land is referred to as the selling price. I mention that the sale actions were not fully received in cash. At the time of registration, the vendors before the sub-registrar stated that the value of the land could not be compared with the land under reference cover. T had increased the compensation to some extent to convince landowners without their consent to lose their land land Landowners did not prove the market value of the land acquired because they had Through the reference, it was claimed that the authorities could not prove that the reference court had. The compensation should not be increased according to the evidence and the provisions of the law, which were recorded by the reference court on the basis of the search and the concrete reason.
