IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS SATURDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2011 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 CRP.No. 840 of 2006() --------------------- OPEL.203/1998 of DIST & SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA .................... REVN. PETITIONER: COUNTER PETITIONER -------------------------------------------------------- KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VAIDHUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.S.SUJIN RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER AND ADDL.PETITIONRS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. K.N.BARAYANAN NAIR (DIED), KIZHAKKE KUDILINGAL VELI, CHARAMANGALAM, MAYITHARA, CHERTHALA. 2. RADHAMONI AMMA, KIZHAKKE KUDILINGAL VELI, CHARAMANGALAM, MAYITHARA, CHERTHALA. 3. PANKAJAKSHY AMMA, KIZHAKKE KUDILINGAL VELI, CHARAMANGALAM, MAYITHARA, CHERTHALA. ADV. SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (SUMATHI SADANAM) THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/12/2011, THE COURT ON 3/12/2011 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS J., - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C.R.P. No.840 of 2006 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 3rd day of December, 2011 ORDER This C.R.P. is filed by the respondent/K.S.E.B. in O.P. (Ele.) No. 203 of 1998 on the file of District Court, Alapuzha. The respondents herein were the petitioners in that O.P., which was filed under Sections 10 to 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, Section51 of the Indian Electricity Act and Section 42 of the Indian Electricity Supply Act. 2. The revision petitioner for drawing Aroor-Mararikulam 110 K.V.line, cut and removed 3 yielding coconut trees and coconut saplings from the property of the petitioner having an extent of 10 cents and Rs.3,850/- was granted as compensation. Being dissatisfied with the compensation granted, the petitioner filed the O.P. claiming enhanced compensation for the trees cut and removed and compensation for diminution in land value. C.R.P. No.840 of 2006 :2: 3. The respondent filed counter stating that the compensation given to the petitioner is reasonable. 4. Before the District Court, PW1 was examined and Exts. A1, C1 and B1 were marked. The learned District Jude on considering the evidence, awarded Rs.962/- as enhanced compensation for the trees cut and removed. Rs.22,400/- was awarded towards diminution in land value. Thus in total, the compensation awarded by the District Judge is Rs.23,362/- with 9% interest from the date of the cutting the trees till the date of realisation and costs from the respondent. Against that order, the respondent filed this C.R.P. 5. Heard learned counsel for the revision petitioner. 6. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the compensation awarded towards diminution in land value is excessive and it is granted without any basis. 7. In Ext.C1 commission report, the Commissioner reports that 8.5 cents of property belonging to the petitioner is injuriously C.R.P. No.840 of 2006 :3: affected due to the drawal of electric line and that the market value of the land is Rs.20,000/- per cent. The learned District Jude on considering the testimony of PW1 and Ext.C1 Commission report assessed the land value as Rs.8,000/- per cent. The District Judge assessed the area injuriously affected as 7 cents and the percentage of diminution in land value is taken as 40%, as the total extent of the property of the petitioner is only 10 cents. Since the compensation awarded by the District Judge is only just and reasonable, I find no reason to interfere with the order. Accordingly this C.R.P. is dismissed as it is without any merits. M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, (JUDGE) dl/