IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 17TH JANUARY 2011 / 27TH POUSHA 1932 CRP.No. 398 of 2008() --------------------- OP(EA)113/2004 of ADDL.DISTRICT COURT, ALAPPUZHA. .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENTS ---------------------------------------------------- KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER --------------------------------------------- ABDUL HAMEED, S/O.ABDULKHADER, KANDATHILPARAMBIL, PUNNAPRA P.O., ALAPPUZHA. ADV. SRI.MOHAN IDICULLA ABRAHAM FOR R1 SRI.MARTIN D.ALUMKARA FOR R1 THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ----------------------------------- C.R.P.No.398 of 2008 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of January, 2011 O R D E R The respondent filed O.P.(Ele.) No.113 of 2004 on the file of the court of the Additional District Judge of Alappuzha, dissatisfied with the compensation awarded by the Kerala State Electricity Board, on account of the trees cut from the property of the respondent for drawing Punnapra-Edathua 110 KV line. 2. The court below relied on the decision reported in Kumba Amma vs. KSEB (2000 (1) KLT 542) and enhanced the compensation for the trees cut. As regards the claim for diminution of land value, the court below enhanced the compensation amount even after finding that there is no injurious affection as contended by the respondent. It was also found that an extent of 10 cents was injuriously affected. Fixing the market value CRP No.398/2008 2 at ` 10,000/- per cent, compensation was awarded for the diminution of land value as well. The total enhanced compensation awarded is ` 23,195/-. 3. In Kerala State Electricity Board vs. Livisha and others (2007 (6) SCC 792), the Supreme Court held thus : “10. 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 tract of land or through the middle of the 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. 11. In 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.” CRP No.398/2008 3 4. In view of the principles laid down in Kerala State Electricity Board vs. Livisha and others (2007 (6) SCC 792), I am of the view that the matter requires fresh consideration by the court below. Accordingly, the order impugned is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the court below for fresh disposal in accordance with law. Both the parties will have an opportunity to produce documents and to adduce such other evidence. The parties shall appear before the court below on 18th February, 2011. The Civil Revision Petition is allowed as above. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl