IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND NOVEMBER 2011 / 11TH KARTHIKA 1933 CRP.No. 196 of 2011() --------------------- OPELE.579/2005 of I ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, TRIVANDRUM .................... REVN. PETITIONER/PETITIONER: ------------------------------- JASMINE,AGED 26 YEARS, D/O.NOORJAHAN,PUNNAVANKONATHU VEEDU, ADOORKONAM PO,ADOORKONAM MURI,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK,DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.DINESH RESPONDENT/RESPONDENTS: -------------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, (KSEB),REP.BY SECRETARY,KSEB, HEAD OFFICE, VAIDHYUTHI BHAVAN,PATTOM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, T.C.SUB DIVISION, KSEB, VAIDHYUTHI BHAVAN,PATTOM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON,SC,KSEB FOR R1 & 2 THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRP.No. 196 of 2011 2 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE-A1 : TRUE COPY OF the MEDICAL CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO the PETITIONER BY Dr.SUNIL D. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL /True Copy/ P.A to Judge THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- C.R.P.No.196 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 02nd day of November, 2011 ORDER Initially, 66kv line was drawn through the property of petitioner and later, it was upgraded into 110kv line. For the said purpose, improvements were cut and removed from the property of petitioner at a width of 2 meters from either side of the existing area cleared by the respondents for drawal of the 66kv line. According to the petitioner, valuable improvements were removed for the said purpose, drawal of the high tension line has resulted in diminution in land value but, first respondent awarded only `.46,637/- as compensation for the trees cut and removed. No amount was awarded as compensation for diminished land value. Claiming enhanced compensation on both counts, petitioner filed O.P(Ele).No.579 of 2005 which learned First Additional District Judge, Thiruvananthapuram has dismissed by the order dated 27.03.2010 holding that no sufficient materials are produced to support the claim for enhanced compensation. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner has contended that from the materials on record, learned Additional District Judge C.R.P.No.196 of 2011 -: 2 :- could come to the conclusion that petitioner is entitled to get enhanced compensation. Learned counsel has invited my attention to Exts.A1 to A7 and B1 to B3. It is contended that from Ext.A4, mahazar and Ext.B1, copy of the Detailed Valuation Statement (for short, "the DVS”) it was possible for the learned Additional District Judge to find whether petitioner is entitled to get additional compensation for value of improvements. It is also contended that based on the extent of improvements involved, the extent of land affected could have been ascertained and particularly when it is not disputed that trees have been cleared by the respondents at a width of 2 meters on either side of the land cleared for drawal of 66 kv line. Learned counsel for respondents contended that for assessment of compensation there must be sufficient datas which petitioner has failed to supply and that, sufficient compensation has already been given. 3. From the submissions made by counsel on both sides it would appear that compensation awarded by the respondents is with respect to the value of improvements alone. If drawal of the high tension line has affected the land injuriously, petitioner is entitled to get compensation for diminished land value. Certainly, for that purpose petitioner has to show the area C.R.P.No.196 of 2011 -: 3 :- affected by the drawal of the line and the land value as on the date of cutting. Unfortunately, petitioner does not appear to have adduced any satisfactory evidence in support of that, except petitioner giving evidence as PW1 which may not be sufficient. 4. So far as the area affected is concerned, it is not disputed that width cleared is two meters from either side of the existing cleared area. If the length of the area thus cleared is also available it is possible to ascertain the extent of land affected by the drawal of the high tension line. 5. So far as the claim for enhanced compensation for value of improvements is concerned, learned Additional District Judge has not adverted to that. Ext.A4 is the copy of mahazar and Ext.B1 is the copy of DVS. The said documents would show the improvements removed from the property of petitioner, its yield and price. (Ext.P3 is the copy of price list). If petitioner disputes the price list it is for him to adduce proper evidence as regards the actual price of the produces as on the date of cutting. Learned Additional District Judge has also to take into account the annuity factor which could be applied having regard to the binding authorities. Having regard to the contentions raised, I am inclined to give parties opportunity to adduce further C.R.P.No.196 of 2011 -: 4 :- evidence in the matter. Resultantly this civil revision is allowed. The order dated 27.03.2010 is set aside. O.P(Ele).No.579 of 2005 is remitted to the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Thiruvananthapuram for fresh disposal after giving parties opportunity to adduce further evidence. (THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-