IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1931 CRP.No. 525 of 2004() --------------------- OPEA.177/2002 of ADDL.D.C. ,ALAPPUZHA. .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): IST RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------------------------- POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., LOCAL OFFICE, NANGIARKULANGARA, KAYAMKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI, SENIOR ADVOCATE RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONERS -------------------------------------------- 1. BHAVANIAMMA, KAROOR VADAKKATHIL HOUSE, KARIMULACKAL MURI, CHUNAKKARA VILLAGE. 2. B.SAVITHRIAMMA, -DO- -DO- 3. B.SOMAVALLY, -DO- -DO- 4. B.PRASANNA, -DO- -DO- 5. N.MOHANAN NAIR, -DO- -DO- 6. N.ANUSUJA, -DO- -DO- ADV. SRI.PHILIP M.VARUGHESE FOR R1 TO 6 SRI.V.AJITH KUMAR FOR R1 TO R6 SMT.M.S.SHAMLA FOR R1 TO R6 SMT.SHERINA MEERAN FOR R1 TO R6 THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/11/2009, THE COURT ON 18/11/2009 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P. BHAVADASAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C.R.P. No. 525 of 2004 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 18th day of November, 2009. ORDER Aggrieved by the additional compensation granted by the District Court, Alappuzha in O.P.(EA) 177 of 2002, counter petitioner before the court below has come up in revision. 2. It appears that 220 KV electric line was drawn through the property of the respondents before the court below. They sought compensation for the trees cut and removed and for the diminution in land value. Details of the number of trees cut and the nature of the trees cut are available from the order of the court below. A sum of Rs.18,519/- was awarded as compensation by the revision petitioner. Dissatisfied with the compensation awarded by the revision petitioner, respondents had approached the District Court. The District court found that though the compensation granted for the yielding trees etc. is reasonable, more amount is due to the respondents with C.R.P.525/2004. 2 regard to pepper vines and an additional compensation of Rs.2,940/- was awarded. Diminution in land value was assessed at Rs.14,400/-. Thus total additional sum of Rs.17,340/- was awarded. 3. According to the revision petitioner, the court below has biased in taking into consideration the yield available from the trees and erred in calculating the amount due for the diminution in land value. According to the revision petitioner, the court ought not to have accepted the claim of the respondents that the property would have fetched more amounts and they are entitled to compensation on that basis. 4. On going through the order of the court below, it can be seen that the court below has considered the various aspects and has come to the conclusion that the respondents are entitled to additional compensation of Rs.17,340/-. It is seen that before the court below petitioners had examined P.W.1 and marked Exts.A1 to A6. Exts.B1 and B2 are marked from the side of the revision C.R.P.525/2004. 3 petitioner. It is seen that the respondents were unable to show that the compensation given for trees cut and removed were inadequate and they are entitled to get more compensation in that respect. However, the court below found that as regards the pepper vines are concerned, the yield has not been properly assessed and that the annuity factor applied is not proper. Therefore the court below held that the respondents are entitled to an additional amount of Rs.2,940/-. 5. The court below assessed the extent of land affected as 8 cents. Property is an agricultural land. The court below has noticed that by the drawing of the line it is not as if the property has become entirely useless, as the petitioners can utilise the same by cultivating certain types of crops. It was on that basis that the percentage in diminution in land value was assessed at 30%. In support of the claim of the petitioners that the property will fetch Rs.30,000/- per cent, no evidence whatsoever was adduced before the court below. But taking note of Ext.A4, which is a copy of C.R.P.525/2004. 4 the order in a similar matter, the court below assessed the land value at Rs.6,000/- per cent and awarded an amount of Rs.14,400/-. The amount awarded seems to be just and reasonable. 6. The claim of the revision petitioner that the enhanced compensation awarded is very high has no basis. The court below has given cogent and convincing reasons as to why it has enhanced the amount. It is significant to notice that the additional compensation has been given only in respect of pepper vine and also the diminution in land value. Even though the petitioner before the court below claimed Rs.30,000/- per cent as the value of the property for the purpose of quantifying the diminution in land value, the court below accepted Rs.6000/- as market value. There is nothing to indicate that the enhanced compensation awarded is excessive. 6. On going through the order, it cannot be said that any grounds are made out to interfere with the order of the court below. The court below has considered all the aspects and C.R.P.525/2004. 5 awarded a just compensation taking note of various principles involved in the assessment of compensation. This Civil Revision Petition is without merit and it is accordingly dismissed. P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sb. C.R.P.525/2004. 6 P. BHAVADASAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C.R.P. No. 525 of 2004 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ORDER 18.11.2009.