IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 13TH DECEMBER 2011 / 22ND AGRAHAYANA 1933 CRP.No. 672 of 2008() --------------------------- OP(ELE.)177/1996 of DISTRICT COURT, PALAKKAD .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (LA), KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER ----------------------------------- R. RAJENDRAN, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O. RAMASWAMY PILLAI, CHITHALI, KUZHALMANNAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.S.M.PREM SMT.K.P.SANTHI SRI.P.RAMACHANDRAN (PALAKKAD) F SRI.P.K.NIJOY THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- C.R.P.No.672 of 2008 --------------------------------------- Dated this 13th day of December, 2011 ORDER This revision is in challenge of the order passed by learned District Judge, Palakkad in O.P(Ele).No.177 of 1996. Initially learned District Judge had disposed of the original petition which this Court interfered in C.R.P.No.1814 of 1999 and the matter was remitted to the learned District Judge by order dated 25.06.2002 for fresh decision. Thereafter further evidence was recorded. Learned District Judge disposed of the original petition by the impugned order awarding additional compensation of `.23,552/- with interest @6% per annum. 2. It is contended on behalf of petitioner that compensation awarded is excessive. It is also contended that no amount could be awarded for diminished land value and at any rate the amount awarded is without any basis. 3. It is not disputed that 220Kv line was drawn through the property of respondent. Petitioner awarded `.1,637/- as compensation. Learned District Judge has accepted Ext.B1, Detailed Valuation Statement (for short, "the DVS”) and the data provided therein but, so far as compensation payable is C.R.P.No.672 of 2008 -: 2 :- concerned, learned District Judge held that what is awarded to the respondent is meager. It is seen from paragraphs 7 and 8 of the order that learned District Jude has considered the income derivable from yielding improvements, value of non yielding trees and concluded that additional compensation of `.22,689/- is payable to the respondent. 4. Though learned counsel contended that compensation awarded for value of improvements is excessive, having regard to the number of yielding and non yielding trees and going through the discussion in paragraphs 7 and 8 of the order I am not inclined to think that amount awarded is exorbitant so as to call for interference by this Court. 5. So far as diminished land value is concerned compensation awarded is only `.2,500/- which I am not inclined to think calls for interference. This original petition is dismissed. (THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-