IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2008 / 18TH POUSHA 1929 CRP.No. 205 of 2005 OP.ELE.97/2001 of ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, THODUPUZHA REVN. PETITIONER: RESPONDENT: ----------------------------- THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDHEEN, SC FOR KSEB SRI.JOSE J.MATHEIKEL, SC, KSEB RESPONDENT: PETITIONER: ------------------------ MINI MOHAN, KONNACKAL (H), MUNIYARA P.O., IDUKKI. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: I.A.NO.560/2005 IN C.R.P.NO.205/2005 DISMISSED 8/1/2008 SD/- K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// AHZ/ K.T.SANKARAN, J. -------------------------------------------- C.R.P. NO. 205 OF 2005 F -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th January, 2008 O R D E R This Revision is filed by the Kerala State Electricity Board challenging the award passed by the court of the Additional District Judge, Thodupuzha in Ele.O.P.No.97 of 2001. For drawing Koothunkal- Panamkutty 110 KV line, yielding rubber trees, cocoa plants and other miscellaneous trees were cut and removed from the property belonging to the respondent. The Board assessed the compensation of Rs.53,049/-. Petition was filed by the respondent under Sections 10 to 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act read with Sections 19 and 51 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 and Section 42 of the Indian Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, claiming a sum of Rs.3 lakhs as enhanced compensation. The court below awarded an enhanced compensation of Rs.59,097/- over and above the amount awarded. Interest at 9% per annum from 27.1.1999 till realisation was also granted. 2. The contention raised by the respondent herein that the yield assessed by the Board is low and that due to the drawal of the line, there was diminution of land value was negatived by the court below on the ground that no evidence was adduced by him. In so far as the price fixed for agricultural produces is concerned, though the court below did not C.R.P. NO.205 OF 2005 :: 2 :: accept Ext.A1 as an authentic document for the value of agricultural produces, fixed the price of coconut at Rs.5/- per nut. It cannot be said that this rate is excessive. The price of pepper fixed by the Board at Rs.190.54 per kilogram was not altered by the court. The court below found that deduction made by the Board for rubber and coffee at 60% and for other improvements at 43.75% was on the higher side. Deduction was fixed at 40% for rubber, 35% for arecanut and cardamom, at 30% for coffee and at 25% for other improvements. The Board could not establish that the deduction as fixed by the Court is improper. Rate of return was fixed on the basis of the Full Bench decision of this Court in Kumba Amma v. K.S.E.B. (2000 (1) KLT 542). 3. Since the court below has not granted compensation for diminution of land value and on other counts taking into account the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in K.S.E.B. v. Livisha (2007 (3) KLT 1(SC)), the Board cannot complain that the amount fixed by the court below as compensation is on the higher side. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/