IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD FEBRUARY 2011 / 14TH MAGHA 1932 CRP.No. 433 of 2007() ------------------------------- OP(EA).101/2002 of ADDL.DISTRICT COURT , ALAPPUZHA. .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER --------------------------------------------------- T.RAJAN, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O.THOMAS, RIJO HOME, VALLIKUNNAM MURI, VALLIKUNNAM VILLAGE, KARTHIKAPALLY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.J.OM PRAKASH RESPONDENT(S): COUNTER PETITIONER ------------------------------------------------------------- POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, LOCAL OFFICE AT NANGIARKULANGARA, HARIPAD. R1 BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = C.R.P. NO. 433 OF 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2011. O R D E R This revision petition is preferred against the order of the Addl. District Judge, Alappuzha in O.P(E.A)101/02. The petitioner has 21 cents of land and the first respondent had cut and removed the trees for the purpose of drawing a 220 KV Electric line. The court below found that 28 yielding rubber trees had been cut and removed and applying the dictum laid down in Kumba Amma v. K.S.E.B. 2000 (1) KLT 542) a reasonable enhancement has been granted. The Court also found that there is no data to show regarding the affliction of the diminution of the land value. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner as well as the respondents. The trial Court has clearly stated in its order CRP NO. 433 of 2007 -:2:- that no acceptable evidence had been tendered to prove the inadequacy, to prove the yielding of the rubber trees and other materials. There was also no data supplied to fix the value of rubber trees. So far as the diminution of land value was concerned nothing was supplied before the Court to arrive at a decision. It is true that the principle enunciated in Kumba Amma's case has undergone a change by virtue of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K.S.E.B. v. Livisha and others reported in 2007 (6) SCC 792. In that decision the Hon'ble Supreme Court has made it very clear that the situs of the land, the affliction etc. are important matters to be considered and there cannot be a strict formula for fixation of compensation. The Court also held that it has to be extended to the fruit bearing trees and other yielding trees as well. CRP NO. 433 of 2007 -:3:- But as stated by the trial Court absolutely no materials are available and years have passed and it cannot be possible to get evidence also at this stage to have a reconsideration of the materials. Therefore taking into consideration those aspects and the positive aspect of applying a uniform formula by a Court to enhance the compensation I feel justice has been done in the matter. Therefore no interference is called for and hence the CRP is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-