Page 1 of 4

Comments on Parta Based Evaluation, 1989 SCMR 1305

1. Comparison of Rates
Rates by Referee Rates by High Court Rates by
Rates in
Type of land Judge (Based on 2 (Based on rates in Award Supreme
Award
years average) & Parta) Court
Bagh Chahi 3,112.00 4,792.00 3,112.00 Award 4,792.00
Chari Abi & Nal Chahi 2,188.00 3,354.80 2,188.00 Award 3,354.80
Bahir Di Abi 883.00 1,522.20 1,522.20 Agreed 1,522.20
Baranger Abi & Maira 212.00 479.20 304.00 Parta 479.20
Banjer Qadeem 106.00 239.60 152.30 Parta 239.60
Ghair Mumkin 53.00 239.60 75.00 Parta 239.60
Abadi 3,112.00 4,792.00 3,112.00 Award 4,792.00

The TABLE above shows 4 sets of rates. Points of particular importance about the rates are:-
a) Rates in award are, presumably, based on one year average.
b) Rates enhanced by learned Referee Judge are based on 2 year average. In addition to the
enhancement of rates, the Objectors were held entitled to 15% compound interest over the
excess amount from the date of taking possession by the acquiring department, till the date
of payment. These rates and 15% compound interest was upheld by august Supreme Court.
c) The Hon’ble High Court decided the rates, partly based on Parta of various kinds of land and
partly on award. Hon’ble High Court also made the following observation:-
“It is clear from a cursory perusal of the joint statement that the learned counsel for the
parties agreed that the market value of Bahir Di Abi type of land be fixed at Rs. 1,522.20 per
kanal. Having agreed on compensation of one kind of the acquired land, necessarily it
follows that the other kind of land is to be in proportionate to their Parta”.
d) Assessed market value of the Bagh Chahi, Chari Abi & Nal Chahi kind of lands by Hon’ble
High Court, on the basis of Parta, was less than the awarded value by collector; therefore
assessment of collector was maintained while other kinds of land were assessed on the
basis of Parta.

2. It is noted in the judgment of august Supreme Court that:

“In our view the observations made by the learned High Court basing the Parta for other kind of land
is not sustainable. So far as Parta is concerned, this formula in the land revenue relates only to the
productivity and profitability of the land and does not deal with the price of land. There is no
statutory indication that for the sale Parta is to be taken for evaluation of the land, because it is not
a recognized mode for assessment of the market value of different kinds of land”.

august Supreme Court observed that, “So far as Parta is concerned, this formula in the land revenue
relates only to the productivity and profitability of the land and does not deal with the price of land.”
 Page 2 of 4

In case different types of land have same potentialities except productivity, then Parta which is a
revenue term for rate of land revenue, becomes the deciding factor for the market value of lands
because higher Parta land has higher productivity and higher market rate and lesser Part land has low
productivity and lower market rate. A relationship is thus established between Parta and market rate
of land. This relationship is made use of in determination of market rates of different types of land
relative to the market rate of Maira type land. Market rate of Maira type land is determined in
accordance with Sec. 23 LAA.
Parta based evaluation of land starts with compliance of the provisions of Sec. 23 LAA and ends with
rates derived on the basis of proportional potentiality of productivity of different types of land in a
rational way, avoiding recourse to arbitrary formulas. It is not correct that Parta relating only to
productivity of land does not deal with the value of land. In fact accepting relationship of Parta with
productivity of land and denying its role in the determination of market value of the land is
contradictory.
August Supreme Court also noted that, “There is no statutory indication that for the sale Parta is to
be taken for evaluation of the land, because it is not a recognized mode for assessment of the
market value of different kinds of land”.
It is submitted that the only statute for the market value of the land is Sec. 23, LAA and it stipulates
consideration of the market value of the land at the date of publication of the notification under
section 4, for determining the amount of compensation to be awarded. Neither one year average
value nor two years average value has the statutory indication in sec. 23, LAA, for this purpose.
Therefore, in respect of not having a statutory indication, Parta based evaluation of land or
evaluation based on one year average value or two years average value have same status and Parta
alone cannot be discarded on this ground.
Regarding the observation of the Apex Court that, “it is not a recognized mode for assessment of the
market value of different kinds of land”, It is submitted that Parta based evaluation of land is
invariably used in situations when some lands in an award have no mutations in one year period prior
to notification of sec. 4, LAA, or the mutations are too unreasonably high or low to be accepted as
genuine value of the lands. Again, when market rate of Bahir Di Abi kind of land under acquisition
was agreed upon by counsels of the parties, Hon’ble High Court resorted to Parta based evaluation
of other kinds of land with the observation that, “Having agreed on compensation of one kind of the
acquired land, necessarily it follows that the other kind of land is to be in proportionate to their
Parta”. It is note worthy that Hon’ble High Court stressed on the evaluation of other kinds of land to
be necessarily proportionate to their Parta. This prooves Parta based evaluation of lands as the sole
mode of evaluation in similar situations.

3. It is noted in the judgment of August Supreme Court that,

“Five years average for the evaluation of market value was the first guideline, then by executive
instructions, after Presidential meeting at Peshawar on 3-5-1967, it was ultimately reduced to one
year average period and was made the basis for evaluation of the market value of the lands. This
 Page 3 of 4

policy was adopted only with the intention to give benefit to affected land owners. Hence under
the circumstances if two years average is more beneficial than one year, then it should be applied
for evaluation of market value and the owners would not be tied up with one year average. The
learned Addl. District Judge Haripur had adopted this method for assessing the market value of
different types of land acquired by the Tarbela Dam Project, which according to our view is the more
equitable method and the same is to be upheld.”

It is obvious from the above observation that taking a magnanimous view August Supreme Court
allowed two years average value for evaluation of lands because it was more beneficial to land
owners who, in most cases were sacrificing their livelihood, for the betterment of their country and
deserved to be reciprocated in the same spirit but Parta based method of evaluation of lands
continued to be used for evaluation of lands even after the ruling against Parta in the cited case.

As a precedent, reference is made to Award No.8/G-B/Acq: Dated 31/7/89, page 50 (Better copy on
page 55) wherein the evaluation of land is based on Parta. This award was issued on 11.02. 1973,
about 5 and a half month after decision of cited case but still Parta based evaluation had to resorted
because no other option was available. This award was challenged in the court and reached finality
on decision of August Supreme Court of Pakistan on 23.6.1998. None of the parties to the case
challenged the evaluation of land based on Parta in the 9 years when the case was in courts;
Judgment of August Supreme Court of Pakistan is referred on pges 62.

Hence, it is submitted that in the case of lands having no mutations or having too high or too low
average value to be genuine, one year prior to notification under sec. 4, LAA, Parta based evaluation
of land is still the sole method of evaluation of such lands which is a proof of its recognition as a
valid method of evaluation of lands under acquisition.

There is yet another case wherein Parta based evaluation of land was resorted to under necessity.
Market rate of Rakkar type land in EX- OW 3/15 of Objection Petition No.40/4 of 2001 and RFA NO.
54/2006 is referred on page 253. The market rate assessed for rakkar type of land in this Exhibit is
 Page 4 of 4

based on six mutations in the period 15.11.1995 to 15.11.1996. One mutation is of Maira type land,
another mutation is mixed one of Maira and Ghair Mazrua types of land, the third one is mixed
mutation of Bari and Ghair Mazrua types of land. All the remaining 3 mutations are of Ghair Mazrua
type of land. The market rate is required of rakkar type of land but there is no mutation of Rakkar
type land in one year period prior to notification of sec. 4, LAA. Parta based evaluation of Rakkar
type of land in the referred Exhibit is the only option.