IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID FRIDAY, THE 28TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 CRP.No. 33 of 2005(B) --------------------- OPEA.180/1998 of ADDL.D.C. & ADDL.MACT,ALAPPUZHA. .................... REVN. PETITIONER/ RESPONDENT: -------------------------------- THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, K.S.E.BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.A.SUDHI VASUDEVAN, SC, KSEB SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB RESPONDENT: PETITIONER: -------------------------- THE SECRETARY, AMMENEZHATHU SREE BHUVANESWARY KSHETHRA DEVASWOM, AROOR, CHERTHALA. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ---------------------------------------------- C.R.P. No. 33 of 2005 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th November, 2008. O R D E R Kerala State Electricity Board is the revision petitioner. This revision is directed against the order dated 4.8.2003 in O.P (Electricity) No.180 of 1998 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Alappuzha. The Board erected a tower in the property belonging to the claimant for the purpose of drawing Aroor- Mararikulam electric line. The claim for compensation for diminution in land value in lump is fixed at the rate of Rs.50,000/- per cent. For cutting and removing the trees standing in the property, the court below has passed an award in O.P(E) No.180/1997 which is produced as Exhibit A1. The court below held in evidence that the total area injuriously affected was 20 cents; out of which compensation awarded was in respect of 14 cents. The court below therefore held that the present area injuriously affected for the purpose of calculating compensation is 6 cents. The learned Judge determined the land value at the rate of Rs.20,000/- per cent, which is the same rate fixed vide Exhibit A1. The learned Judge also held that since the tower is erected C.R.P. No. 33 of 2005 : 2 : and the entire 6 cents has been utilised for the same, the respondent is entitled for compensation for the said area. The court below awarded Rs.1,20,000/- as compensation. The amount fixed by the court below is reasonable and justifiable. On the facts and circumstances proved, I am unable to take different view in this matter. In the result, the revision fails. It is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE