IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND JANUARY 2008 / 12TH POUSHA 1929 CRP.No. 117 of 2004() --------------------- OPEA.76/2002 of ADDL.D.C. ,ALAPPUZHA. .................... REVN. PETITIONER: 1ST RESPONDENT: --------------------------------- POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., LOCAL OFFICE, NANGIARKULANGARA, KAYAMKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI RESPONDENTS: PETITIONERS: ------------------------- 1. JAYADEVAN, THAYYIL VADAKKATHIL, BHARANIKKAVU THEKKUM MURI, KATTANAM VILLAGE. 2. SHOBHANA KUMARI, DO. DO. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER IN I.A. NO.333/04 IN CRP NO.117/04 DISMISSED 2.1.08 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE. M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- C.R.P. NO. 117 OF 2004 --------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of January, 2008 ORDER This revision petition is preferred against the award of the Additional District Judge, Alappuzha in OP(EA) 76/02 whereby a sum of Rs.18,000/- was awarded as additional compensation. A perusal of the award would reveal that there were 29 yielding rubber trees, 12 non-yielding rubber trees and few other timber trees like teak wood etc. The court below considered the matter and fixed the compensation on the basis of the land value and diminution of the land value. The court relied upon the award of the Land Acquisition Court, which revealed that the land value per centage is Rs.7,856/-. The court took the distance and other factors and fixed the centage value at Rs.6,000/- per cent and thereafter found that 10 cents has been affected and that the diminution in the land value would be 30%. Then the court below awarded a compensation of Rs.18,000/-. Even applying the principles laid down in K.S.E.B. v. Livisha [2007 (3) KLT 1] it can be seen that the materials and particulars which is really necessary to calculate the compensation had been duly taken CRP NO.117/04 2 note of by the court below and only thereafter an award has been passed. Therefore, the award does not call for any interference. The civil revision petition is dismissed. Since the matter is being dismissed, notice is dispensed with. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps CRP NO.117/04 3