IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2008 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1930 CRP.No. 409 of 2008() --------------------- OPELE.105/2004 of ADDL.D.C. & ADDL.MACT,ALAPPUZHA. .................... REVN. PETITIONER: RESPONDENT ---------------------- KSEB, REP. BY THE SECRETARY,KSEB THIRUVANANTHAPUREAM. BY ADV. SRI. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER ----------------- AMBIKA DEVI, D/O.LEKSHMIKUTTIAMMA, KIZHAKKE MEVALLOOR, PUNNAPRA, ALAPPUZHA-4. BY THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------- C.R.P.No.409 of 2008 ------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd June, 2008. O R D E R Kerala State Electricity Board is challenging the order, dated 18.12.2007, in O.P. (Ele.) No.105/2004, on the file of the Additional District Court, Alappuzha, by filing this revision petition under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure. Admittedly, petitioner Board cut and removed certain trees from the property of the respondent in Survey No.354/20 of Punnapra Village, for drawing Punnapra-Edathua 110 KV line. A compensation of Rs.6260/= was awarded, which was received by the respondent under protest. She lodged a claim for enhanced compensation for the trees and also for diminution of the land value. Learned District Judge, on the evidence of Exts.A1 to A4 and Exts.C1 to C3, granted an enhanced compensation of Rs.13,214/=, which is challenged in this petition. Learned District Judge found that the total extent of the property which is adversely affected by drawing of line is 3 cents. That finding was based on Ext.C1 report and Ext.C2 sketch. Learned District Judge also found that there would be a diminution of the land value to the extent CRP No.409/2008 2 of 30% with respect to that three cents, and fixed the land value at the rate of Rs.10,000/= per cent and awarded diminution in land value of Rs.9000/= for the said three cents. Rs.4214/= was granted as enhanced value for the trees cut. The enhanced compensation has been fixed based on the principles laid by the Apex Court in Livisha v. KSEB (2007 (3) KLT 1). Though learned counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that the enhanced compensation is unreasonable, I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the award passed by the learned District Judge. The award is reasonable and fair. Revision is therefore dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE nj.