IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 28TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 9TH PHALGUNA 1929 CRP.No. 132 of 2002() --------------------- OPELE.95/1997 of ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, THODUPUZHA .................... REVN. PETITIONER: /PETITIONER IN O.P(ELE)NO.95/97: -------------------------------------------------- VARGHESE, S/O. JOSEPH, POOVATHINGAL HOUSE, VELLAYAMKUDI P.O., KATTAPPANA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH PUNNOOSE RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: ---------------------------------- KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY IT'S SECRETARY, K.S.E.BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS V.JACOB SANJEEV V BHASKAR SRI. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- C.R.P. NO. 132 OF 2002 --------------------- Dated this the 28thday of February, 2008 ORDER This civil revision petition is preferred against the order of the Additional District Judge, Thodupuzha in OP (Ele) 95/97. By the said award the court below has awarded a compensation of Rs.9,591/- with 10% interest. Against that decision, the claimant has preferred an appeal. 2. I had perused the award passed by the court below. It is seen that the court has taken into consideration each and every aspects for fixing the compensation in this case. The court has considered the number of trees, its yielding capacity, the multiplier to be applied as well as the price of the commodities and has reduced the expenses of cultivation to 25% and has calculated the compensation. One cannot find fault with the court for arriving at such a decision since it has done the same on the basis of the materials available before it. Therefore, I do not find any ground to interfere with the award passed by the court below. The civil revision petition is accordingly dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps C.R.P. NO.132/02 2