IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2010 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1931 CRP.NO. 916 OF 2007() -------------------- {OP (ELE.)180/1997 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC), ERNAKULAM} .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENT ----------------------------------------- KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER: --------------------------------- SRI. SHANMUGHAN, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O NARAYANAN, KALLIYAT, THYKKODAM, COCHIN. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. --------------------------------------- C.M.Application No.1007 of 2007 & C.RP.No.916 of 2007 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of March, 2010 O R D E R Revision is directed against the order dated 15.10.1995 in O.P.(Ele)No.180/97 which was disposed of by a common judgment with other petitions by the learned Additional District Judge, Ad hoc-I, Ernakulam, awarding enhanced compensation to the petitioner in the above original petition. The respondent in the original petition, the Kerala State Electricity Board [hereinafter referred to as 'the Board'] has filed the revision contending that the enhanced compensation awarded by the court is excessive and unreasonable. The revision was filed with a petition to condone the delay of 144 days. Though notice was ordered on the delay petition, till date, steps have not been taken by the Board. The learned counsel appearing for the Board sought for one more opportunity for taking steps on the delay petition. C.R.P.No.916 of 2007 :: 2 :: 2. Considering the fact that the revision has been filed as early as in 2007 and steps have not been taken taken so far, I find it necessary to examine the merit of the order impugned to consider whether a fresh opportunity is to be given to the Board for taking steps against the respondent warranting a disposal of the revision on merits after hearing the respondent. 3. I heard the learned counsel for the Board. 4. From the impugned order and also from the submissions made by the learned counsel, it is seen that 110 KV electric lines from Bhrahmapuram to Panampilly Nagar were drawn through the property of the respondent/claimant, and the claim had been raised in respect of the loss sustained by him. 5. It is seen from the order that the claimant had possession of only 2.5 cents of land situated in Vyttila, a most prominent place in the Kochi city. Towards the value of the trees cut and removed, the Board had paid a sum of Rs.421/-. C.R.P.No.916 of 2007 :: 3 :: The claimant had claimed compensation for the injurious affection over his land by the drawing of the line. The court below, considering the market value of the land and taking into account the injurious affection on account of the drawing of the line, determined such compensation and awarded a sum of Rs.39,375/- to the claimant. The land value was fixed at Rs.45,000/- per cent and diminution of the land value was determined at 35%. The learned District Judge found that the entire extent of 2.5 cents owned and possessed by the claimant suffered injurious affection by the drawing of the line. The learned counsel for the Board impeaches the correctness of the assessment of centage value and also the percentage of diminution of value fixed by the learned District Judge contending that both are excessive. 6. I do not find any merit in the submission. It is seen that the centage value was fixed on the basis of a commission report collected by deputing an advocate commissioner and also examining other relevant materials C.R.P.No.916 of 2007 :: 4 :: produced in the case. Electric lines were drawn over the property of the petitioner for drawing of 110 KV line. In the case of 110 KV line and 220 KV line, it goes without saying that not only the area through which the lines passed, but also sufficient area on both sides have to be kept unhindered for facilitating the free flow of energy. A clearing area has to be provided to see that no obstruction is caused to the flow of energy though such lines. 7. Having regard to the fact that the claimant had only 2.5 cents over which 110 KV electric line has been drawn, I find no impropriety or illegality in the conclusion formed by the learned District judge that the entire area was injuriously affected by the lines drawn over that property. Over that small plot, the claimant is now prevented from putting up any structure or growing any high yielding trees. Practically, the whole property, so far as the claimant is concerned, has been rendered useless. C.R.P.No.916 of 2007 :: 5 :: 8. Viewed in the back drop that the land is situated in a prominent place in the Kochi city, I find, the compensation awarded by the court below cannot be considered as excessive or unreasonable. In such circumstances, I find that there is no merit in the revision. Petition for condonation of delay and the revision are dismissed. Sd/- (S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN) JUDGE sk/- //true copy//