THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. ANTONY LAIJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FOR drawing 110 KV electric line from Aroor to Mattancherry, the property belonging to the respondent was crossed and 11 yielding coconut trees and certain other trees were cut. The total extent of the property in the possession of the respondent is 13.24 Ares. A sum of Rs. 13,745/ - was awarded by the Kerala State Electricity Board to the respondent. Dissatisfied with the award, the respondent filed O.P. (E.A.) No. 34 of 2007 before the court below claiming an additional compensation of Rs. 8 lakhs together with interest.

(2.) BEFORE the court below, the respondent was examined as PW1. Though the respondent contended that he is entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs. 5,000/ - each for the coconut trees and other amounts for the rest of the trees, the court below was not inclined to accept his contention on the ground that his case is not substantiated by taking out a Commission and that the amount awarded by the Board was just and reasonable.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is not established in the case that an extent of 16 cents of land has become useless as a result of the drawal of the electric line. It is also not established that the diminution of land value can be granted at 30% of the land value. It is submitted that since the respondent has not taken out a Commission, the court below was not justified in granting a compensation of Rs. 2,40,000/ - in the absence of any proof of the claim. It is to be noted that the court below rejected the claim for enhancement of compensation in respect of the trees cut, only on the ground that the respondent failed to take out a Commission. But the court below took a different stand when it considered the question of diminution of land value. Even without any material on record, the court below fixed the percentage of diminution of land value at 30% and thought that an extent of 16 cents of land would be affected by the drawal of the line. As regards the market value of the property, the court below, in the absence of any cross examination by the Board, held that the market value of the property would be Rs. 50,000/ - per cent.