High Court Kerala High Court

Kerala State Electricity Board vs Santhamma on 29 August, 2008

Kerala High Court
Kerala State Electricity Board vs Santhamma on 29 August, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

CRP.No. 410 of 2008()


1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. SANTHAMMA, W/O.THANKAPPAN PILLAI,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB

                For Respondent  :DR.V.N.SANKARJEE

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :29/08/2008

 O R D E R
                 M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.
                   ...........................................
                    CRP.No. 410              OF 2008
                   ............................................
      DATED THIS THE           29TH         DAY OF AUGUST, 2008

                                  ORDER

Kerala State Electricity Board is challenging the award

passed by Additional District Court, Alappuzha in O.P(ele) 71 of

2005 for drawing Kalamassery-Aroor 110 KV line through the

property of respondent in Survey No.412/1A of Aroor Village. A

compensation of Rs.547/- was awarded being the value of one

coconut tree which was cut and removed. Compensation was

received under protest. Respondent filed the petition before

District Court for enhanced compensation contending that there

is diminution in the land value for which no compensation was

awarded. Learned District Judge, based on the evidence of

Ext.A1 and B1 granted an enhanced compensation of Rs.12,138/-

finding that there will be diminution of land value to the extent

of 30% in respect of two cents of the property through which the

line has been drawn. The award is challenged in this petition

filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure.

2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner and

respondent were heard.

3. The argument of the learned counsel appearing for

CRP 410/2008 2

petitioner is that learned District Judge awarded compensation

based on the decision in Kumbhamma V. KSEB (2000(1) KLT

542)which was subsequently modified by Apex Court in Lavisha

V. K.S.E.B(2007(3) KLT 1). But based on Kumbhamma’s case,

only a compensation of Rs.12,138/- was granted. I do not find it

necessary to interfere with the said enhanced compensation.

4. With regard to diminution of land value, learned

District Judge found that in Ext.A1 order of CRP 1271 of 2003,

for the neighbouring property, market value of Rs.30,000/- was

fixed. Learned District Judge has fixed the land value at

Rs.20,000/- and finding that there is diminution of land value to

the extent of 30%, granted enhancement of Rs.12,000/-. I do not

find any illegality or irregularity, warranting interference.

Petition is dismissed.

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE

lgk/-