IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2011 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1932 CRP.No. 810 of 2006(A) ---------------------------------- O.P(ELE).58/2003 of ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, ALAPPUZHA. .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENT: -------------------------------------------------------- KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDHYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER: ----------------------------------------------- SMT. PADMINI, W/O. KARUNAKARAN, MANEZHATHUVEETTIL, AROOR VILLAGE, CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DIST. BY ADV. SRI.C.V.MANUVILSAN SRI.G.B.PANICKER THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts P.BHAVADASAN, J. ---------------------------- C.R.P.No. 810 of 2006 --------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of March, 2011 ORDER Aggrieved by the enhanced compensation granted to the respondent by the lower court the Kerala State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to the board) has approached this court in revision. 2. The Board for the purpose of drawing Mattancherry - Aroor 110 KV electric transmission line cut and removed certain trees standing in the property owned and possessed by the respondent. An amount of Rs.47,414/- was paid as compensation. Dissatisfied with the said amount the respondent approached the court below as per O.P.(Electricity)No.58/2003. The court below for want of evidence declined to grant further compensation for the trees cut and removed. However, the court below found that no amount has been paid towards diminution in land value. Taking 13 cents as the affected portion of the property and 30% as diminution in land value and Rs.10,000/- per cent price of land an amount of Rs.39,000/- was granted compensation towards diminution in land value. 3. The grievance of the board is that the amount given towards diminution in land value with 7.5 percent interest per annum is very C.R.P.No. 810 of 2006 2 much on the higher side and the respondent is not entitled to that amount. There was no basis for taking the land value as 10,000/ the court below have adduced the evidence available on record. 4. The contention raised above is without any basis. Even though the case of the respondent before the court below was that 22 cents were affected the court below has taken an extent of only 13 cents as affected portion of the property. That obviously is based on the commissioner's report available in the case. Even though the respondent herein before the courts below had produced documents to show that the land value was Rs.50,000/- per cent court below for convincing and cogent evidence chose to adopt only Rs.10,000/- per cent as the land value. 30% percent diminution in land value assessed on the reasonable side also is just and proper. Therefore, the result is that there are no grounds are made out to interfere with the order of the court below and accordingly the revision petition is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE. ln