Revision by Power Grid Corporation against enhanced compensation awarded to a landowner for trees felled and diminution in land value caused by drawing 400 KV electric lines across his property. The High Court found the assessment methodology and 50% award for affected area just and proper and dismissed the revision petition.
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. 725 OF 2018
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN OPELE NO.68 OF 2012 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT, NORTH PARAVUR
REVISION PETITIONER/S:
POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA B-9 QUTAB INSTITUTIONAL AREA, KATWARIASARAI, NEW DELHI, REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER, 400 KV SUBSTATION, 400 KV SUB STATION, VELLANIKKARA (P.O), MANNUTHY, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
RESPONDENT/S:
1 ROY P.K., AGED 56 YEARS S/O.KURIAKOSE, PALANATTU HOUSE, IRINGOLE KARA, IRINGOLE P.O., PERUMBAVOOR VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT- 683 542.
2 THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF ENERGY, DEPARTMENT OF POWER, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI110 001.
4 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., CHEVARAMBALAM, KOZHIKODE- 673017. BY ADVS. ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL SRI.V.RAJENDRAN (PERUMBAVOOR) SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA SRI.N.RAJESH
OTHER PRESENT:
CGC SUVIN R.MENON; SR.PP.V.TEKCHAND
THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
19.03.2024, THE COURT ON 03.06.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CRP No.725 of 2018
-2-
ORDER
Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2024
The revision petitioner, Power Grid
Corporation of India Ltd ('the Corporation' for short), is aggrieved by the enhanced compensation ordered to be paid to the first respondent ('the claimant' for short), consequent upon the drawing of 400 KV electric lines across his property by the Corporation. The essential facts are as under;
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
CRP No.725 of 2018
original petition was filed, seeking enhanced compensation towards the value of trees cut and diminution of land value.
Corporation and Adv.V.Rajendran Perumbavoor for the claimant.
that the court below has assessed the loss sustained due to cutting of yielding coconut palms by assessing the average number of nuts per 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 yielding 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. Similar method was adopted for calculating the loss sustained due to the
CRP No.725 of 2018
-4-
cutting of mango trees and pepper vines. For reckoning the compensation amount payable, 8 was taken as the multiplier. Further, the court below fixed the compensation for cutting of various other trees at Rs.10,000/-. Being so, this Court finds the procedure adopted by the court below to be just and proper.
CRP No.725 of 2018
-5-
cents). Accordingly, the claimant was found entitled to compensation of Rs.13,39,400/- 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 No.725 of 2018
-6-
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 petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
V.G.ARUN JUDGE
Scl/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the enhanced compensation for trees cut and diminution in land value due to drawing of 400 KV electric lines was correctly assessed by the court below.
Whether the court below was bound by Government guidelines in fixing land value and whether 8% interest was lawful.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
KSEB v. LivishaApplied¶5
(2007) 6 SCC 792 · Who else cites this
Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd.
Roy P.K.
The Union of India
The Secretary to Government, Energy Department, Power
The 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
