This revision petition was disposed by dismissing the petitioner's claim that the lower court erred in fixing a specific compensation rate, as the lower court had independently assessed damages based on specific facts.
The civil revision petition was dismissed with no merit being found.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH JANUARY 2008 / 9TH MAGHA 1929
CRP.No. 357 of 2007 -------------------------OP(ELE) 165/1995 of I ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, PALAKKAD
REVN. PETITIONER: 2ND RESPONDENT.
-------------------------------------------------------POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., LOCAL OFFICE, NANGIARKULANGARA, KAYAMKULAM, REP. BY ITS MANAGER.
BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI,SC FOR POWER GRID C
RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER.
-----------------------------------------
CHACKO, AGED 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT VADAKKUMPARAMBIL, KODUVALPARA DESOM, POTHUNDI VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK.
BY ADV. SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K. SRI.LIJU. M.P SRI.M.N.SAJEER
THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
M.N.KRISHNAN, J
=====================
C.R.P. No.357 OF 2007
=====================
Dated this the 29th day of January 2008
O R D E R
This revision petition is preferred against the award of the I Addl.District Judge, Palakkad in O.P.(Ele.)165 of 1995, whereby the court below has granted an additional compensation of Rs.1,572/-. Or, in other words, from the fixation of Rs.55,000/-, it was enhanced to Rs.56,572/-. The revision petitioner had argued that in the decision reported in Kumba Amma v. K.S.E.B(2000(1) KLT 542), the court below has fixed 5% return is no longer to be followed in toto for the reason that the Apex Court in the decision reported in KSEB v. Livisha(2007(3)KLT 1(SC) has held that each case has to be decided on the facts and circumstances of that case and had given the guidelines for which compensation is to be calculated. Here, the additional compensation awarded is Rs.1,572/-. The court below has taken into consideration the age of the trees, yield, the present value and had independently assessed the same and awarded an enhanced compensation of Rs.1,572/-. This will show that the court below had applied its mind properly in fixing the compensation.
CRP 357/2007
-:2:-
Therefore, there is no merit in this revision petition. Hence it is
dismissed.
M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE
Cdp/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the fixation of 5% return in the award of the lower court should be quashed in light of the Supreme Court decision in KSEB v. Livisha.
Whether the lower court properly applied its mind while enhancing compensation based on tree age and yield.
Whether the civil revision petition against the Quantum of circuit damage compensation has any merit.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kumba Amma v. K.S.E.BReferred¶19
Kumba Amma v. K.S.E.B(2000(1) KLT 542)
KSEB v. LivishaReferred¶19
KSEB v. Livisha(2007(3)KLT 1(SC)
Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd.
Chacko
M.N.Krishnan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
