EDATHIL SUNDARAN Vs. K S E B

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree passed by the Sub Court, Kozhikode in O.S.No.80 of 1995. It is the case of the plaintiff that the Kerala State Electricity Board had installed an 11 KV electric transformer and cables in the plaint schedule property which is having an area of 320 sq. ft and this has been done without any acquisition or consent of the plaintiff and thereby had caused damages to the plaintiff and so compensation is claimed.

(2.) DEFENDANTS, on the other hand, would contend that the transformer was installed only on the side of Francis Road in National Highway and the plaintiff has not raised any sort of objection and therefore the plaintiff cannot plead now regarding damages. It is also contended that the transformer was erected as early as in 1988 and the plaintiff did not move his little finger till 1992.

(3.) THEN the next question will be when the transformer was installed. The trial court decided that it was in 1992 for the reason that KSEB did not produce the materials to show when it was installed. There is no doubt there will be documents to prove the installation of an 11 KV electric transformer. It is a matter that has also to be looked into by the KSEB. For this, the KSEB has to produce the documentary evidence. Whether there had been silence on the part of the plaintiff and whether it would amount to deprivation of his legal right, also can be considered by the court below. It is true that the question of limitation is not as such raised in the written statement. But when the suit is one for compensation there is a statutory period or limit prescribed by law. Any court of law exercising jurisdiction has to be convinced about the legality of the claim and therefore it is also a matter that has to be looked into. From these discussions, I find that the judgment and decree passed by the trial court requires interference and they are set aside and the matter is remitted back to the trial court for the following considerations:(1) The trial court shall issue a Commission, if possible, the very same Commissioner, if she is available to demarcate the property with respect to the title deed of the plaintiff and by directing the surveyor to assist her for properly demarcating the property. (2) Both the parties be given opportunity to adduce evidence regarding the year of installation of the transformer and if possible, the date and month and thereafter decide the question regarding the limitation question as well and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the trial court on 17.12.2010. Being an old matter expeditious trial may be attempted. Send back the records immediately.