IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 24TH MAGHA 1929 CRP.No. 153 of 2007() --------------------- OPEA.27/2003 of ADDL.DISTRICT COURT,ALAPPUZHA. .................... REVN. PETITIONER: RESPONDENT. ------------------------------ POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., LOCAL OFFICE, NANGIARKULANGARA, KAYAMKULAM, REP. BY ITS MANAGER. BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENTS: PETITIONERS. ------------------------ 1. OMANA MATHEW, W/O.K.M.MATHEW, KAIKOTTUMMALIYIL PUTHENPARAMBIL THALAVADY VILLAGE, NOW RESIDING AT B.SATHYAVATHASADAN, ASHANAGAR, CHEMBUR, BOMBAY. 2. ZARINA MATHEW, D/O.OMANA MATHEW, DO. DO. 3. MAMMAN MATHEW, S/O.K.M.MATHEW, DO. DO. 4. MARINA ABRAHAM, D/O.OMANA ABRAHAM, DO. DO. 5. GEEVARGHESE PHILIP. S/O.CHAKO PHILIP, KAIKKOOTTUMALIYIL PUTHEN PARAMBIL, THALAVADY VILLAGE. (R1 TO R4 ARE REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER R5) BY ADV. SRI.J.OM PRAKASH THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- C.R.P. NO. 153 OF 2007 --------------------- Dated this the 13thday of February, 2008 ORDER This civil revision petition is preferred against the award of the Additional District Judge, Alappuzha, in OP(EA) 27/03 whereby he has allowed an amount of Rs.13,500/- as additional compensation. 2. A perusal of the award would reveal that there were two yielding coconut trees besides other non-yielding trees. The court after having taken into consideration the age of the tree, its average fruit bearing capacity etc., awarded enhanced compensation of Rs.3,500/-. So far as diminution of land value is concerned, the contention is to the effect that a line has been drawn through the middle of the property. But the court held that it has been drawn over a portion of the property and the property affected is only minimal. After considering all those aspects, had awarded an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards the diminution of the land value. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has brought to my attention that the court has relied upon the decision in Kumba C.R.P. NO.153/07 2 Amma v. K.S.E.B. [2000 (1) KLT 542] wherein the court has ordered to take uniform annuity of 5% for calculation of compensation. In K.S.E.B. v. Livisha [2007 (3) KLT 1] the Apex court has held that each case has to be considered on the facts and circumstances of that case. This is a case where the court below has applied its mind to arrive at a compensation with the materials available. So there is application of mind and consideration of facts. As the amount awarded is not excessive, I feel that there are no grounds 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.153/07 3