Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Joji John vs Power Grid Corporation Of India Ltd on 22 September, 2022

Author: C.S Dias

Bench: C.S.Dias

                                   1
CRP Nos. 461 , 462 & 464 of 2014
and
147 & 148 of 2015


             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
 THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 31ST BHADRA, 1944
                        CRP NO. 461 OF 2014
     AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP 64/2011 OF THE FIRST
               ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, KOZHIKODE
REVISION PETITIONER/S:

             JOJI JOHN
             S/O JOHN, PULIKKAL (HOUSE), KAITHAPOYIL (P.O),
             PUTHUPPADY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT
             BY ADV SRI.JESWIN P.VARGHESE


RESPONDENT/S:

             POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD
             REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN
             REGION, UGRAPURAM, AREACODE P.O, MALAPPURAM
             DISTRICT 673639

             BY ADV.MILLU DANDAPANI
      THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 22.09.2022 ALONG WITH CRP NOS 462 AND 464 OF 2014 AND 147
AND 148 OF 2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
                                    2
CRP Nos. 461 , 462 & 464 of 2014
and
147 & 148 of 2015


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
 THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 31ST BHADRA, 1944
                        CRP NO. 462 OF 2014
    AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP 174/2010 OF THE FIRST
              ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, KOZHIKODE
REVISION PETITIONER/S:

           FATHIMA @ PATHUMAI
           AGED 48 YEARS
           W/O.HAMSA HAJI, PUZHAKUNNEL HOUSE, KAITHAPOYIL
           (P.O)KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
           BY ADV SRI.JESWIN P.VARGHESE


RESPONDENT/S:

           DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER
           POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD,SOUTHERN
           REGION, UGRAPURAM, AREACODE (P.O),MALAPPURAM
           DISTRICT PIN - 673 639.

           BY ADV.MILLU DANDAPANI

    THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP
FOR ADMISSION ON 22.09.2022 ALONG WITH CRP NOS
461 AND 464 OF 2014 AND 147 AND 148 OF 2015, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                    3
CRP Nos. 461 , 462 & 464 of 2014
and
147 & 148 of 2015


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
 THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 31ST BHADRA, 1944
                        CRP NO. 464 OF 2014
    AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP 220/2012 OF THE FIRST
              ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, KOZHIKODE
REVISION PETITIONER/S:

           FATHIMA @ PATHUMAI
           AGED 48 YEARS
           W/O.HAMSA HAJI, PUZHAKUNNEL HOUSE, KAITHAPOYIL
           P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
           BY ADV SRI.JESWIN P.VARGHESE


RESPONDENT/S:

           DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER
           POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., SOUTHERN
           REGION, UGRAPURAM, AREACODE P.O., MALAPPURAM
           DISTRICT, PIN - 673 639.

           BY ADV.MILLU DANDAPANI
    THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP
FOR ADMISSION ON 22.09.2022 ALONG WITH CRP NOS
461 AND 462 OF 2014 AND 147 AND 148 OF 2015, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                    4
CRP Nos. 461 , 462 & 464 of 2014
and
147 & 148 of 2015


             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
 THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 31ST BHADRA, 1944
                        CRP NO. 147 OF 2015
    AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP 341/2012 OF THE FIRST
               ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, KOZHIKODE
REVISION PETITIONER/S:

             T.J.JIMMY
             AGED 45 YEARS
             S/O.T.V.CHACKO, THANNIKKAL HOUSE, VALLIYAD,
             KAITHAPOYIL P.O, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
             BY ADV SRI.JESWIN P.VARGHESE


RESPONDENT/S:

             POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.
             REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN
             REGION, UGRAPURAM, AREACODE P.O, MALAPPURAM
             DISTRICT. 673 639.

             BY ADV.MILLU DANDAPANI
      THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 22.09.2022 ALONG WITH CRP NOS 461 , 462 AND        464 OF 2014
AND 148 OF 2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
                                    5
CRP Nos. 461 , 462 & 464 of 2014
and
147 & 148 of 2015


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
 THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 31ST BHADRA, 1944
                        CRP NO. 148 OF 2015
    AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT in OP 337/2012 OF THE FIRST
              ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, KOZHIKODE
REVISION PETITIONER/S:

           T.V.CHACKO
           S/O.VARGHESE, THANNIKKAL HOUSE, VALLIYAD,
           KAITHAPOYIL P.O, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
           BY ADV SRI.JESWIN P.VARGHESE


RESPONDENT/S:

           POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD
           REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN
           REGION, UGRAPURAM, AREACODE P.O, MALAPPURAM
           DISTRICT. 673 639.

           BY ADV.MILLU DANDAPANI
      THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 22.09.2022,ALONG WITH CRP NOS.461, 462, 464 OF 2014 AND 147
OF 2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                      6
CRP Nos. 461 , 462 & 464 of 2014
and
147 & 148 of 2015


                            C.S DIAS,J.
                   ---------------------------
          CRP Nos. 461, 462 & 464 of 2014
                            and
                  147 & 148 of 2015
                   -----------------------------
      Dated this the 22nd day of September, 2022.

                       COMMON ORDER

The revisions petitions are filed by the petitioners in OP Nos 64/2011, 174/2010, 220/2012, 341/2012 and 337/2012 of the Court of the First Additional District Judge, Kozhikode, dissatisfied by the compensation awarded by the Court for the trees cut and removed from their properties as provided under Sec.51 of the Indian Electricity Act, 2003, read with Secs. 10 and 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885.

2. When the revision petitions were taken up for consideration, Sri.Jeswin P.Varghese, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that in a batch of cases, i.e., CRP No.144/2013 and connected cases, this Court, by its common order dated 7.3.2017, in cases 7 CRP Nos. 461 , 462 & 464 of 2014 and 147 & 148 of 2015 arising of the orders passed by the same court in respect of the same project, i.e., Mysore-Kozhikode 400 K.V Electric line, had following the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kerala State Electricity Board v. Livisha [2007 (3) KLT 1], remanded back all the cases to the court below with a direction to consider the yield received from each tree in the land and determine the diminishing value of the land value after ascertaining the market value of the respective property. Even though the present batch of cases were also filed along with the earlier disposed of cases, they were not included in the list. Hence, the petitioners are also entitled to an order of remand as held by this Court in the common order in CRP No.144/2013.

3. The above submission was not seriously opposed by Sri.Millu Dandapani, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent in all the cases.

8

CRP Nos. 461 , 462 & 464 of 2014 and 147 & 148 of 2015

4. I have appreciated the pleadings, the materials on record, the impugned order and the common order passed in CRP No.144/2013. I find that the present batch of cases are similarly situated to the cases disposed of by this Court in the above-stated common order. In fact, the grounds in all the cases are one and the same. Therefore, I am of the considered view that the petitioners in these revision petitions are also entitled to the same benefit of remand for the purpose of directing the court below to consider the aspects as laid down in CRP No.144/2013 and connected cases, that is to fix the compensation following the yardstick laid down in Livisha (supra), determine the yield received from each tree and determine the land value, after ascertaining the market value and other factors.

In the result, the revision petitions are allowed in the following manner:

9

CRP Nos. 461 , 462 & 464 of 2014 and 147 & 148 of 2015
(i) CRP No.461/2014 is allowed by setting aside the order in OP No.64/2011 of the Court of the First Additional District Judge, Kozhikode.

(ii) CRP No.462/2014 is allowed by setting aside the order in OP No.174/2010 of the Court of the First Additional District Judge, Kozhikode.

(iii) CRP No.464/2014 is allowed by setting aside the order in OP No.220/2012 of the Court of the First Additional District Judge, Kozhikode.

(iv) CRP No.147/2015 is allowed by setting aside the order in OP No.341/2012 of the Court of the First Additional District Judge, Kozhikode.

(v) CRP No.148/2015 is allowed by setting aside the order in OP No.337/2012 of the Court of the First Additional District Judge, Kozhikode.

(vi) The court below is directed to consider the yield received from each tree in the land belonging to each of the petitioners.

10

CRP Nos. 461 , 462 & 464 of 2014 and 147 & 148 of 2015

(vii) The court below is directed to determine the diminishing land value after ascertaining the market value and any other factors relating to the assessment.

(viii) The court below is directed to follow the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Livisha (supra).

(ix) Needless to mention, the parties would be at liberty to let in additional evidence, if so advised.

(x) The parties are directed to appear before the court below on 17.10.2022 in person or through their respective counsel.

(xi) As the cases are of the year 2010 to 2012, the court below is directed to consider and dispose of the original petitions, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.

sd/-

   sks/22.9.2022                        C.S.DIAS, JUDGE