IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
CRP.No. 1045 of 2006()
1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
... Petitioner
2. THE DEPUTY TAHASILDAR,
Vs
1. SMT.ANICE JOSE,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB
For Respondent :SRI.M.M.ALIAS
The Hon'ble MR. Justice HARUN-UL-RASHID
Dated :12/03/2009
O R D E R
HARUN-UL-RASHID,J.
---------------------------
C.R.P.NO.1045 OF 2006
---------------------------
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2009
O R D E R
Respondents in O.P.(Ele.)No.168/2001 on the file of
the Additional District Court (Adhoc-II), Ernakulam are the
revision petitioners. The K.S.E. Board awarded an amount of
Rs.55,670/- towards compensation for the cut and removal of the
trees standing in the property belonging to the claimant. The
court below modified the amount awarded and granted
additional compensation of Rs.2,04,748/- with 6% interest. The
order of the court below is under challenge.
2. Ext.R1(a) is a detailed statement showing the
computation of compensation prepared in favour of the
petitioner. The K.S.E. Board, as per Ext.R1(a), assessed as
compensation an amount of Rs.1,13,464/- for the loss caused to
the claimant for cutting of various trees, which stood in his
property. The trial court noted the fact that in Ext.R1(a) the sum
-2-
CRP.No.1045/2006
fixed is Rs.1,13,464/-; but the K.S.E. Board granted only a sum
of Rs.55,670/- as compensation. There is no dispute that Ext.R1
(a) was prepared by the Revenue Officers attached to the Board.
3. The lst respondent (revision petitioner) at the time
of evidence explained the circumstances under which a sum of
Rs.55,670/- was paid, even though compensation was assessed in
Ext.R1(a) as Rs.1,13,464/-. The trial court perused the revised
valuation statement and concluded that the computation was
made correctly and properly, based on the datas covered by
Ext.R1(a) and by applying the principles of law. Therefore, the
enhancement of compensation granted for cutting and removal
of trees did not require any modification.
4. Regarding the additional compensation for
diminution in land value the respondent claimed an amount of
Rs.10,000/- per cent. Taking into account the importance of the
locality wherein the property is situated, the court below fixed
the land value at Rs.4,000/- per cent, the diminution in land
-3-
CRP.No.1045/2006
value was assessed at 25% and an amount of Rs.45,500/- was
awarded.
6. The compensation awarded under the two heads as
stated above are just and reasonable. The court below had
considered all the facts and circumstances of the case and granted
additional compensation based on the evidence on record. I find
no reason to interfere with the order passed by the court below.
C.R.P. is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
HARUN-UL-RASHID,
Judge.
kcv.