IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 6TH AUGUST 2009 / 15TH SRAVANA 1931 CRP.No. 457 of 2008() --------------------- OP(ELE)29/1999 of I ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, PALAKKAD .................... REVISION PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENT: -------------------------------------------------------------- KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. MR. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB, MR.T.C.SURESH MENON, MR.JIBU P. THOMAS, MR.P.S.APPU. RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER: ----------------------------------------------- AMEER HAMSA, S/O. MULAKKAL KUNHIMOIDU, AGED 51 YEARS, REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, HAMSA KUTTY HAJI, S/O. CHEMMALA SAIDALI, AGED 71 YEARS, RESIDING AT POOVATHANI, CHETHALLOOR, MANNARKKAD TALUK. BY MR.V.CHITAMBARESH, SENIOR ADVOCATE, MR.T.C.SURESH MENON. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C.R.P.No.457 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 6th August, 2009 ORDER The revision is directed against the order dated 8.3.2007 in O.P.(Ele.)No.29 of 1999 passed by the First Additional District Judge, Palakkad. The respondent filed the above O.P. under Section 51 of the Indian Electricity Act seeking enhanced compensation for the damages to his property by the drawing of overhead lines by the Kerala State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board'). For the purpose of drawing 220 KV Thrichur-Calicut line, valuable trees were cut down from his property and by the overhead line drawn the property suffered injurious affectation and diminution his land value was the case canvassed by the respondent contending that the compensation paid by the Board was inadequate and unreasonable. The Board has provided only a compensation of Rs.63,016/- whereas the loss was much more was the case the claimant. Resisting the claim for enhanced compensation, the Board contended that reasonable compensation had been paid. In the enquiry on the petition, an advocate commissioner conducted a local inspection and filed a report ascertaining the matters essential for a proper and fair adjudication of the claim. On the side of the plaintiff, CRP No.457/08 - 2 - he was examined as P.W.1. Two valuation statements prepared at different points of time were exhibited as A1 and B1. The learned Additional District Judge, after appreciating the materials produced and recalculating the compensation providing 5% annuity return in the place of 10% annuity return adopted by the Board for providing compensation to the trees cut and removed arrived at the conclusion that a sum of Rs.91,486.97 was payable to the respondent. So much so, deducting the compensation of Rs.52,618.72 already paid by the Board on that count, it was held that the respondent is entitled to have an enhanced compensation of Rs.38,868.25 on that count. Towards diminution of the land value on account of the drawing of the overhead line, the claim of the respondent was based on the basis of the market of the property at Rs.15,000/- per cent. On the basis of the commission report, the learned Additional District Judge found 64 cents of land out of three acres of the property of the respondent was injuriously affected by the drawing of the overhead line. Taking note of the material circumstances presented, the land value was fixed at Rs.3000/- per cent and diminution suffered on account of the drawing of the overhead lines was fixed at 20% by the learned District Judge. Accordingly, a sum of Rs.35,400/- was assessed as the CRP No.457/08 - 3 - sum payable towards diminution of land value. On the materials placed in the case, I find that the assessment of the land value and the percentage of diminution in land value made by the Additional District Judge cannot be considered as in appropriate. No justifiable circumstance has been canvassed to show that the area determined and the compensation fixed suffered from any infirmity. The total enhanced compensation adjudged by the court below at Rs.74,268/- as payable to the respondent in the given facts of the case is found to be unassailable. Challenges raised in the revision impeaching its correctness are devoid of any merit. Revision is dismissed. srd S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE