IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2008 / 21ST PHALGUNA 1929 CRP.No. 74 of 2007() -------------------- OP EA.37/2003 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.K.P.DANDAPANI (SR.) RESPONDENTS: --------------------- SOSAMMA, W/O.THOMAS K. ABRAHAM, PANACKAL HOUSE, THALAVADY VILLAGE, NOW RESIDING AT KARIMPARAMBIL HOUSE, T.C.7/32, SCHOOL LANE, OPP.L.J.C.OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.J.OM PRAKASH THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/03/2008, ALONG WITH CRP NO.595 OF 2007 AND ANOTHER, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRP 74/07 2 ORDER ON I.A.NO.266/07 IN CRP NO. 74/07 DISMISSED 11.3.2008 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- C.R.P.Nos.74/2007, 191/2007 & 595/2007 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of March, 2008 ORDER These Revision petitions are preferred against the award passed by the Additional District Judge, Alappuzha in O.P.(E.A.) No.37/03, O.P.(E.A.)No.604/02 and O.P.No.(E.A.)No.103/00. 2. In O.P.No.37/03, the trial court has awarded an enhanced compensation of Rs.67,917/- with 6% interest. It is very clear from the said decision that the court has applied the dictum laid down by this Court in Kumba Amma v. K.S.E.B. [2000 (1) KLT 542] for fixing the annuity factor at 5%. The said court also had taken into consideration the diminution of the land value for 22 cents of property valuing the property at Rs.5,000/- per cent and fixing the value of diminution at 20% awarded Rs.32,000/- as compensation. 3. In O.P.No.604/02 the court has awarded an enhanced compensation of Rs.70,145/- with 6% interest. In that case also the court has considered the dictum laid down by this court in Kumbamma’s case and awarded an amount of Rs.34,145/- as CRP 74/2007 & conn. 2 additional compensation for the trees cut. So far as the diminution of the land value is concerned, the court has fixed the per cent value at Rs.7,500/- and held that 16 cents are effected and calculated the diminution of land value at 30% and awarded a compensation of Rs.30,000/- towards diminution of land value. 4. In O.P.No.103/00, the court below has awarded an additional compensation of Rs.31,853/- with 6% interest. There also the court had taken into consideration the dictum laid down in Kumbamma’s case and awarded Rs.31,853/- as additional compensation for the trees cut. It did not grant any compensation for the diminution of the land value. Now the learned counsel for the revision petitioner contends before me that the court below has erred in taking a uniform annuity return of 5% in these cases for the reason that the Apex Court in the decision in K.S.E.B. v. Livisha [2007 (3) KLT 1] held that each case has to be considered on the facts and circumstances of that case. The Apex Court has also laid down the following guidelines in such cases which is extracted as follows: “The situs of the land, the distance between the high voltage electricity line laid thereover, the extent of the line thereon as also the fact as to whether the high voltage line passes over a small track of land or through the middle of the CRP 74/2007 & conn. 3 land and other similar relevant factors in our opinion would be determinative. The value of the land would also be a relevant factor. The owner of the land furthermore, in a given situation may lose his substantive right to use the property for the purpose for which the same was meant to be used. So far as the compensation in relation to fruit bearing trees are concerned the same would also depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case.” 5. In the light of the above enunciated principles the matter requires reconsideration at the hands of the court below. Therefore, the awards under challenge are set aside and the cases are remitted back to the court below for fresh disposal after affording equal opportunities to both sides to adduce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and dispose of the matter in accordance with law. The parties are directed to appear before the court below on 11.4.2008. The Civil Revision Petitions are disposed of as above. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE csl CRP 74/2007 & conn. 4 MSN(J) JUDGMENT S.A.NO.32 OF 1995 CRP 74/2007 & conn. 5 19/2/2008