| Case ID |
232ebea3-e5c0-4306-8b46-d2483189dc08 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Appeals Nos. 939/2004, 144-K, 145-K of 2009, |
| Decision Date |
|
| Hearing Date |
Jan 14, 2004 |
| Decision |
The Supreme Court of Pakistan dismissed the appellants' appeals, holding that Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which provides for additional compensation, only applies to outstanding amounts of compensation not previously received. The court interpreted the provision purposively, emphasizing that it serves as an inducement for prompt payment of compensation rather than as a premium for landowners. Consequently, the appellants were not entitled to additional compensation for amounts already received. Additionally, in Civil Appeals Nos.144-K and 145-K of 2009, the court enforced the doctrine of laches, ruling that the respondents' delayed claim for additional compensation after fourteen years was barred. The court underscored the importance of timely enforcement of rights and declined to reopen closed transactions. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case D-2741 of 2016, heard by the Supreme Court of Pakistan on January 14, 2004, the court deliberated on the interpretation of Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The case, cited as 2016 SLD 731 and 2016 PLD 514, involved appellants DILAWAR HUSSAIN and others contesting compensation awarded under land acquisition procedures. The judges, MIAN SAQIB NISAR, UMAR ATA BANDIAL, and MAQBOOL BAQAR, examined whether additional compensation cited by the appellants was justified under the Act. The Supreme Court ruled that Section 28-A was intended to ensure prompt payment of compensation and did not extend to compensating amounts already disbursed. This interpretation was based on a purposive approach, prioritizing legislative intent over mere literal meaning. Furthermore, in cases C.A. No. 939 of 2004 and HRC Nos. 20691-S and 48247-S of 2013, the court highlighted the doctrine of laches, dismissing claims for delayed compensation arising fourteen years post-acquisition. The decision underscored the necessity for timely legal action to enforce rights, emphasizing that the law cannot be manipulated through undue delays. The judgment extensively referenced precedents and legal doctrines, ensuring a robust framework for future land acquisition disputes. By reinforcing the statutory intent of Section 28-A, the court aimed to balance the interests of landowners with the government's imperative for efficient land acquisition. This case serves as a pivotal reference for interpreting compensation laws in Pakistan, ensuring that legal provisions are applied with their intended purpose, thereby promoting judicial consistency and fairness in land-related matters. The ruling emphasizes the importance of timely enforcement of legal rights and the limitations imposed by doctrines like laches, shaping the landscape of land acquisition and compensation jurisprudence in Pakistan. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
Province of Sindh,
Land Acquisition Collector,
Federal Shariat Court,
Land Acquisition Act, I of 1894
|
| Judges |
MIAN SAQIB NISAR,
UMAR ATA BANDIAL,
MAQBOOL BAQAR
|
| Lawyers |
Syed Shahenshah Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court,
Adnan Karim, Addl. A.G. Sindh.,
Khair Muhammad, AC Sanghar,
Ghulam Mohi-ud-Din Qureshi, Advocate Supreme Court,
Mazhar Ali B.Chohan, Advocate-on-Record
|
| Petitioners |
DILAWAR HUSSAIN and others
|
| Respondents |
PROVINCE OF SINDH
|
| Citations |
2016 SLD 731,
2016 PLD 514
|
| Other Citations |
The Judge in a Democracy by Aharon Barak,
Messrs Gadoon Textile Mills and 814 others v. WAPDA and others 1997 SCMR 641,
Rana Aamer Raza Ashfaq and another v. Dr. Minhaj Ahmad Khan and another 2012 SCMR 6,
Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary and others v. MQM through Deputy Convener and others PLD 2014 SC 531,
Dr. Raja Aamer Zaman v. Omar Ayub Khan and others 2015 SCMR 1303,
Reference No.1 of 2012 (PLD 2013 SC 279),
Federation of Pakistan through Ministry of Finance and others v. Messrs Noori Trading Corporation (Private) Limited and 14 others 1992 SCMR 710,
Mumtaz Hussain v. Dr. Nasir Khan and others 2010 SCMR 1254,
Oliver Ashworth (Holdings) Ltd. v. Ballard (Kent) Ltd. [1999] 2 All ER 791,
AIR 2007 SC 1563,
AIR 2001 SC 724,
Pakistan International Airlines Corporation v. Aziz-ur-Rehman Chaudhry and another 2016 SCMR 14,
Waris v. Muhammad Sarwar 2014 SCMR 1025,
Trustees of the Port of Karachi v. Organization of Karachi Port Trust Workers and others 2013 SCMR 238,
S. Sharif Ahmed Hashmi v. The Chairman, Screening Committee, Lahore and another 1980 SCMR 711,
Jannat-ul-Haq and 2 others v. Abbas Khan and 8 others (2001 SCMR 1073),
Muhammad Iqbal and 17 others v. Ghaunsullah Khan and 17 others (2002 CLC 1533),
Mehreen Zaibun Nisa v. Land Commissioner, Multan and others (PLD 1975 SC 397),
Federation of Pakistan through Secretary Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Islamabad v. Dr. Mubashir Hassan and others (PLD 2012 SC 106),
Union of India v. Sankalchand Himatlal Sheth and another (AIR 1977 SC 2328),
East End Dwelling Company Ltd v. Finsbury Borough Council (1),
Seaford Court Estates Ltd. v. Asher (1949) 2 All ER 155,
Towne v. Eisner (1917) 245 US 418,
Helvering v. Gregory, 69 F 2d 809,
River War Comrs v. Adamson, (1877) 2 AC 743,
M. Pentiah v. Veeramallappa, AIR 1961 SC 1107
|
| Laws Involved |
Land Acquisition Act, I of 1894
|
| Sections |
4,
28-A,
34
|