IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE 12TH MARCH 2009 / 21ST PHALGUNA 1930 CRP.No. 1045 of 2006() -------------------------------- OP(ELE).168/2001 of ADDL.DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC)-II, ERNAKULAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHASILDAR, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. MR.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- SMT.ANICE JOSE, W/O.JOSE, KEERIKKATTIL HOUSE, OUNJAPPARA KARA, KEERAMPARA VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK, ERNAKULAM, NOW RES. AT KEERIKKATTIL (H),CHATTUPARAKARA, MACHIPLAVU P.O., ADIMALI VILLAGE,DEVIKULAM TALUK,IDUKKI DIST. BY ADVS. MR.M.M.ALIAS FOR R1 MR.DIAS CHERIAN FOR R1 THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/03/2009 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: HARUN-UL-RASHID,J. --------------------------- C.R.P.NO.1045 OF 2006 --------------------------- DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2009 O R D E R Respondents in O.P.(Ele.)No.168/2001 on the file of the Additional District Court (Adhoc-II), Ernakulam are the revision petitioners. The K.S.E. Board awarded an amount of Rs.55,670/- towards compensation for the cut and removal of the trees standing in the property belonging to the claimant. The court below modified the amount awarded and granted additional compensation of Rs.2,04,748/- with 6% interest. The order of the court below is under challenge. 2. Ext.R1(a) is a detailed statement showing the computation of compensation prepared in favour of the petitioner. The K.S.E. Board, as per Ext.R1(a), assessed as compensation an amount of Rs.1,13,464/- for the loss caused to the claimant for cutting of various trees, which stood in his property. The trial court noted the fact that in Ext.R1(a) the sum -2- CRP.No.1045/2006 fixed is Rs.1,13,464/-; but the K.S.E. Board granted only a sum of Rs.55,670/- as compensation. There is no dispute that Ext.R1 (a) was prepared by the Revenue Officers attached to the Board. 3. The lst respondent (revision petitioner) at the time of evidence explained the circumstances under which a sum of Rs.55,670/- was paid, even though compensation was assessed in Ext.R1(a) as Rs.1,13,464/-. The trial court perused the revised valuation statement and concluded that the computation was made correctly and properly, based on the datas covered by Ext.R1(a) and by applying the principles of law. Therefore, the enhancement of compensation granted for cutting and removal of trees did not require any modification. 4. Regarding the additional compensation for diminution in land value the respondent claimed an amount of Rs.10,000/- per cent. Taking into account the importance of the locality wherein the property is situated, the court below fixed the land value at Rs.4,000/- per cent, the diminution in land -3- CRP.No.1045/2006 value was assessed at 25% and an amount of Rs.45,500/- was awarded. 6. The compensation awarded under the two heads as stated above are just and reasonable. The court below had considered all the facts and circumstances of the case and granted additional compensation based on the evidence on record. I find no reason to interfere with the order passed by the court below. C.R.P. is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. kcv.