IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2008 / 6TH SRAVANA 1930 CRP.No. 704 of 2005() --------------------- OP(ELE).95/1999 of DISTRICT COURT, ALAPPUZHA .................... REVN. PETITIONER: RESPONDENT ---------------------------- THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.A.SUDHI VASUDEVAN, SC, KSEB SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB RESPONDENT: PETITIONER ----------------------- M.N.GOPI, S/O.NARAYANAN, THATTARACKAL VELIYIL, THANNEERMUKKOM (N) VILLAGE, CHERTHALA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.SABU THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON I.A. 1934 OF 2005 IN CRP.704 OF 2005 DISMISSED 28TH JULY, 2008. SD/- M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. OKB/- /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------------------ C.R.P. NO. 704 OF 2005 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 28th day of July, 2008 O R D E R Kerala State Electricity Board, the respondent in O.P (Ele). 95 of 1999 on the file of District Court, Alappuzha filed this revision petition challenging enhanced compensation granted by the District Court for drawing KVM- Maruthorvattom 11KV electric line through the property of the respondent in Survey No.17/7-2 of Thanneermukkom North Village. Trees were cut and a compensation of Rs.1,600/- was awarded. It was received under protest. Respondent filed the petition claiming enhanced compensation. It was contended that because of the drawing of electric line extent of 2 cents became completely useless and he is entitled to get an additional compensation of Rs.27,000/-. Learned District Judge on the evidence granted an enhanced compensation of Rs.6,000/- being the diminution of land value. It was found that 2 cents of property of the respondent was effected injuriously. Fixing land value at Rs.10,000/- per cent, enhanced compensation was granted. This petition is filed challenging the award. CRP704/05 2 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner and learned counsel appearing for respondent were heard at the admission stage. 3. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner argued that there is no evidence to prove the land value or diminution of land value and therefore the enhanced compensation granted is unsustainable. 4. The impugned award shows that though no oral evidence was adduced, land value was fixed based on Ext.A1 sale deed. Land value fixed was only Rs.10,000/- per cent. It was found that the Ext.A1 was three years subsequent to the date of cutting of the trees and properties are similar. It was found that 2 cents of the property was adversely affected. It was found that diminution of land value would be 30% of 2 cents. It is considering all the facts enhancement of Rs.6,000/- was granted. I do not find any reason to interfere with the order and there is no illegality or irregularity. Revision petition is dismissed. M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE Okb/-