IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 6TH MARCH 2008 / 16TH PHALGUNA 1929 CRP.No. 839 of 2005() --------------------- OPELE.353/2002 of ADDL.D.C. & ADDL.MACT,ALAPPUZHA. .................... REVN. PETITIONER: 1ST RESPONDENT -------------------------------- POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., LOCAL OFFICE,NANGIARKULANGARA,KAYAMKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. BY ADV. SRI.M.A.SHAFIK RESPONDENTS: PETITIONERS ------------------------ 1. SMT.NARAYANI,VIJAYABHAVAN, ERIKKAVU P.O.,KUMARAPURAM, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. SMT.VIJAYAMMA,VIJAYABHAVAN, ERIKKAVU P.O.,KUMARAPURAM, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.R.BINDU THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- C.R.P.No.839 of 2005 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of March, 2008 ORDER This revision is preferred against the award of the Additional District Judge, Alappuzha whereby the learned Additional District Judge has awarded an additional compensation of Rs.6,232/- with 6% interest. 2. A perusal of the award would reveal that the court has taken into consideration the materials and held that he is entitled to a compensation of Rs.2,632.19/- towards the value of the trees cut and removed and Rs.3,600/- towards the diminution of land value. The court found that in the facts and circumstances the decision of this Court in Kumba Amma vs. K.S.E.B. [2000 (1) KLT 542] has to be applied and therefore, awarded an enhanced compensation of Rs.2,632.19/-. So far as diminution of the land value is concerned the court held that 30% can be taken as the percentage of the diminution. It fixed the market rate at Rs.6,000/- per cent and then granted an additional compensation of Rs.3,600/- towards diminished utility of land. It is not very much on the higher side though specific CRP839/2005 2 reasons are not granted to fix the market value of the property. It is true that as per the latest decision of the Apex court in K.S.E.B. v. Livisha [2007 (3) KLT 1] each case has to be considered on the facts and circumstances of that case. But a perusal of the award would reveal that the court has taken into consideration the number of trees, its utility and others facts and then has only applied the annuity factor of 5%. Therefore, I hold that there is no serious illegality or irregularity committed by the court below. The C.R.P. lacks merits and dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE csl