IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 11TH OCTOBER 2010 / 19TH ASWINA 1932 CRP.No. 506 of 2010() --------------------- OPELE.99/2003 of II ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, KOLLAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN OP: ------------------------------------- FRANCIS, S/O.AUGUSTINE, AGED 59 YEARS, RESIDING AT MARY VILLA, CHIRAKARAPUTHUVAL, MARUTHADI P.O., SAKTHIKULANGARA VILLAGE, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.MILTON RESPONDENT: --------------- THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, VAIDHYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB FOR R-1 THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- C.R.P.No.506 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this 11th day of October, 2010 ORDER Respondent appears through counsel. Heard both sides. 2. This petition is in challenge of order dated 23-04-2010 in O.P.(Ele.)No.99 of 2003 of the court of learned Additional District Judge-II, Kollam as per which additional compensation of Rs.24,405/- was awarded to the petitioner with interest @7.5% per annum from the date of application. Petitioner is aggrieved in that compensation awarded is low and that the interest should have been awarded from the date of tree cutting. Learned counsel states that report of the Advocate Commissioner has not been taken into account in the proper manner. Learned counsel for respondent would contend that value of land fixed by the learned Additional District Judge is without any basis. 3. I have gone through the order under challenge and find that extent of land affected by the drawal of 110kv line has been taken as 5 cents out of which according to learned Additional District Judge 1.680 cents is used for installation of the tower and taking Rs.15,000/- as the land value per cent, Rs.23,000/- is awarded for the 1.680cents and for the remaining 3.320 cents compensation is awarded @2,000/- per cent. It is C.R.P.No.506 of 2010 : 2 : seen that in fixing the land value and basis for compensation for area other than occupied by the tower there is no factual basis adopted by the learned Additional District Judge. Petitioner states that he has produced Exts.A1 to A6 in support of his contention but, it is seen that in fixing the land value, no reference has been made to any document produced by the petitioner. Learned Additional District Judge has not gone into the question whether entire 5 cents is rendered useless on account of drawal of the line and in the light of the report of Advocate Commissioner. Assuming that the entire extent of 5 cents is not rendered totally useless, learned Additional District Judge has to decide the area for compensation payable for that much of the property not covered by tower. Learned Additional District Judge has also to consider whether for additional compensation if any payable interest is to be paid from the date of tree cutting or from the date of application. In the light of the above, I am unable to sustain the order under challenge. Resultantly this petition is allowed, order under challenge is set aside and the case is remitted to the trial court for fresh decision after consideration of all the points involved and after giving parties an opportunity to adduce further evidence if any. Parties shall appear in the trial court on 30-10-2010. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-