IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 7TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 18TH MAGHA 1929 CRP.No. 754 of 2002() --------------------- OP(ELE) 50/1993 of ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, N. PARAVUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER: RESPONDENT ------------------------------------- K.S.E.BOARD,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY ADV. SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN,SC, KSEB RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER -------------------------------- EBRAHIM ERUPPAKKOTTIL HOUSE, PERINGALA KARA,KUNNATHUNADU VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/02/2008 ALONG WITH CRP NO. 2153 OF 2002, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRP No. 754 OF 2002 ORDER ON CMP No. 5762 OF 2002 IN CRP No. 754 OF 2002 DISMISSED 07.02.2008 SD/- M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- C.R.P. Nos. 754 & 2153 OF 2002 --------------------- Dated this the 7thday of February, 2008 ORDER CRP No. 2153/02 is preferred against the award of the Additional District Judge, North Paravur in OP(Ele) 49/93 and C.R.P. No. 754/02 is preferred against the award of the same court in OP (Ele) 50/93. A perusal of the award would reveal that in OP(Ele) 49/93 the court granted an additional compensation of Rs.9832/- and in OP(Ele) 50/93 the court awarded an additional compensation of Rs.1,34,660.74/-. In both cases, the court awarded interest at the rate of 6%. 2. The entire order is perused by me. So far as OP(Ele) 49/93 is concerned, the court granted an additional compensation of Rs.2,800/- for the rubber trees cut, an amount of Rs.1003.44/- for one yielding coconut tree, a sum of Rs.395.87/- for one kilo of pepper vine, a sum of Rs.569.79/- for three yielding mango tees and a sum of Rs.4,087.98/- for 3 yielding tamarind trees and thereby enhanced the compensation by Rs. 8,857.08/- (i.e. 9832 -8,857 = 975). It can be seen from the award itself that the court has considered each and C.R.P. Nos. 754 & 215302 2 every aspect specifically with reference to the income, age, yielding, multiplier, value and thereafter has awarded this enhancement. It is absolutely based on the principles and therefore, I do not find any ground to interfere with the said award granted by the court and therefore CRP 2153/02 is only to be dismissed. 3. So far as OP(Ele) 50/93 is concerned, the court granted an additional compensation of Rs.6,269.35/- for one coconut tree and another four coconut trees. It took the net income and fixed the price at the rate of Rs. 4 per coconut. Considering the future yielding capacity as 30 years applied multiplier of 9.427 and awarded enhanced compensation of Rs.6,269.35/-. 4. So far as it related to 130 yielding rubber trees, it was found that the age of the trees were 7 years. The court calculated gross yielding from a tree at 75 gms. per day, fixed the number of tapping days at 125 and after deducting 9/16 towards expenses found that the total yielding derivable is 685.49 Kg. It took into consideration Rs.20.63/- as the value of one kilo rubber and calculated the future yielding period as 24 years, applied the multiplier 8.985 and awarded enhanced compensation of 97,954.48/-. 5. The court then had taken into consideration 20 pepper C.R.P. Nos. 754 & 215302 3 wines and took the net yield from a pepper vine at 3 Kg and fixed the yielding period for future at 12 years, applied the multiplier of 6.814 and awarded enhanced compensation of Rs.879.51. 6. Then the court considered about the three yielding jack fruit trees and found that the compensation awarded is reasonable. So far as tamarind trees were concerned, the court took the yielding capacity at 10 Kgs. per year and considered the future yielding at 40 years, applied a multiplier of 9.779 and awarded a compensation of Rs.4,355.77/-. 7. With respect to the four arecanut trees, the court took the net yield at Rs.300 nuts calculated the rate per nut at 40 ps. considered future yielding power for further 32 years, applied multiplier 9.526 and awarded enhanced compensation of 2,200.02/-. So far as the four yielding cashew nut trees and three mango trees are concerned, the court applied the principle on the basis of the yield, took a proper multiplier and held that the claimant is entitled to additional compensation of Rs.1,163.11/- and Rs.2,100/- respectively under those heads. Thus the total compensation awarded came to Rs.1,14,922/-. 8. A perusal of the award would convincingly establish that the C.R.P. Nos. 754 & 215302 4 court has applied its mind totally into the facts and circumstances of the case and the available materials and thereafter has awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,34,660.74/- in OP(Ele) 50 of 1993. So, I do not find that the court has committed any error, which requires interference at the hands of this court. Therefore, the civil revision petitions are devoid of merit and they are accordingly dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps C.R.P. Nos. 754 & 215302 5 C.R.P. Nos. 754 & 215302 6