Revision petitions by a landowner and Power Grid Corporation against compensation fixed by the district court for trees cut and diminution in land value from drawing 400 KV lines. The High Court upheld the assessment method, the 50% award over affected area, and 8% interest, dismissing both petitions.
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 V.G.ARUN
MONDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 13TH JYAISHTA, 1946 CRP NO. 503 OF 2018
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 28.11.2017 IN OPELE NO.81 OF 2011 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, NORTH PARAVUR REVISION PETITIONER/S:
TESSY MATHAI AGED 65,W/O.MATHAI,PUNCHAPUTHUSSERY HOUSE,CHOORAKKADU KARA,PATTIMATTOM VILLAGE,KUNNATHUNADU TALUK,ERNAKULAM-683562. BY ADVS. SRI.K.C.ELDHO SRI.ANEESH JAMES SRI.JIJO THOMAS SRI.MALLENATHAN.M. SMT.K.SINDHU ELIAS
RESPONDENT/S:
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.PP.K.P.HARISH;SR.GP.V.TEKCHAND
THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27.05.2024, ALONG WITH CRP.806/2019, THE COURT ON 03.06.2024, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CRP Nos.503/2018 & 806/2019
-2-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
MONDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 13TH JYAISHTA, 1946
CRP NO. 806 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN OPELE NO.81 OF 2011 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, NORTH PARAVUR
REVISION PETITIONER/S:
THE POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD CONSTRUCTION AREA OFFICE, MAVELIPURAM COLONY, KAKKANAD, COCHIN-682 030. BY ADV ROJO J.THURUTHIPARA
RESPONDENT/S:
1 TESSY MATHAI AGED 73 YEARS W/O.MATHAI, PUNCHAPUTHUSSERY HOUSE, CHOORAKKODU KARA, PATTIMATTOM VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNAD TALUK-683 562.
2 SPECIAL THASILDHAR(LA), POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., CHEVARAMBALAM, KOZHIKODE-673 017. BY ADVS. SRI.K.C.ELDHO SRI.MALLENATHAN.M.
THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27.05.2024, ALONG WITH CRP.503/2018, THE COURT ON 03.06.2024, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CRP Nos.503/2018 & 806/2019
-3-
ORDER
Dated this the 03rd day of June, 2024
These revision petitions are filed
challenging the order passed by the Additional District Judge, North Paravur in O.P. (Electricity) No.81 of 2011. The original
petition was filed by the revision petitioner in CRP No.503 of 2018 (hereinafter called 'the
claimant'), being dissatisfied with the
compensation awarded towards the damage and loss sustained due to the drawing of 400 KV lines across her property by the Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd (hereinafter called 'the Corporation'). The essential facts are as under;
According to the claimant, she is in ownership and possession of landed property having an extent of 4.33 Ares comprised in Re-
Sy.Nos.362/15 and 362/16 in Block No.27 of
CRP Nos.503/2018 & 806/2019
-4-
Pattimattom Village in Kunnathunadu Taluk. The
land was cultivated with various yielding and non-yielding trees. In order to facilitate drawing of lines for the smooth transmission of power, large number of trees were cut from the claimant's property. The drawing of high tension lines rendered the land underneath and adjacent to the lines useless, resulting in diminution of the value of the property. In spite of the huge loss suffered, only meagre amount was paid to the claimant as compensation for the loss sustained. Hence, the original petition was filed, seeking enhanced compensation towards the value of trees cut and diminution of land value.
Adv.Millu Dandapani for the Corporation.
that the court below has assessed the loss
sustained due to cutting of yielding coconut palms by assessing the average number of nuts per
CRP Nos.503/2018 & 806/2019
-5-
year and multiplying it with the value of one
coconut after deducting the immature falling and expenses. Likewise, the loss sustained due to cutting of areca palm was assessed by reckoning the total yield from each palm, the weight of nuts after drying and the price of dried nuts. Based on such assessment, the net income was fixed after deducting the immature falling and expenses. For reckoning the compensation amount payable, 8 was taken as the multiplier. Being so, this Court finds the procedure adopted by the court below to be just and proper.
that, for the purpose of fixing the compensation towards diminution in land value, the court below relied on Ext.A2 sale deed as well as Exts.C1 and C1(b) commission report and plan. Based on the
said factors and on consideration of the fact that the petition schedule property is not having any motorable pathway access, the land
CRP Nos.503/2018 & 806/2019
value was fixed at Rs.1,20,000/- per cent and awarded 50% of the land value as compensation for the affected area admeasuring 3.97 Ares (9.81 cents). Accordingly, the claimant was found entitled to compensation of Rs.7,69,700/- with interest at the rate of 8% per annum.
order, it is seen that the compensation due towards diminution in land value was fixed based on factors like situs of the land, the extent to which the land is adversely affected and consequent diminution in the value of the land,
as laid down by the Apex Court in KSEB v. Livisha
[(2007) 6 SCC 792]. Similarly, the discretion vested with the court was properly exercised by awarding 50% of the land value as compensation for the land affected due to the drawing of electric lines.
CRP Nos.503/2018 & 806/2019
-7-
the Government having issued guidelines for fixation of the land value, the court below ought to have fixed the value in accordance with the same is liable to be rejected since the court is not bound by the guidelines/orders issued by the Government while fixing the compensation. The contention that the court below committed an illegality by awarding interest at the rate of 8% per annum being without merit, is also liable to
be rejected. As such, I find no reason to interfere with the well considered order of the court below, rendered after taking all relevant factors into consideration.
For the aforementioned reasons, the civil revision petitions filed by the claimant as well as the Corporation are dismissed. The enhanced compensation fixed by the court below shall be paid within three months of receipt of a copy of this order. If any amount is deposited pursuant to the order of this Court or otherwise, the same
CRP Nos.503/2018 & 806/2019
-8-
shall forthwith be released to the claimant on
her filing appropriate application.
Sd/-
V.G.ARUN
JUDGE
Scl/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the compensation awarded for tree cutting and diminution of land value due to drawing of 400 KV electric lines was just and proper.
Whether the court below was bound by Government guidelines in fixing land value for compensation.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
KSEB v. LivishaApplied¶5
(2007) 6 SCC 792 · Who else cites this
Tessy Mathai
Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd
Special Tahsildar (LA), Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd
V.G.Arun
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
