Smt Savithramma vs The Executive Engineer Karnataka Power on 1 August, 2011

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Smt Savithramma vs The Executive Engineer Karnataka Power on 1 August, 2011

Bench: K.Sreedhar Rao

} W.i?'.?\E(}. l5{377:'2{_}{}8

 

{N THE HIGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 0191' IDAY OF AEEGUST 2011 

BEFORE

THE HONBLE3 MR.JUS'I'ICE K.SR1;E{)HgR%%m,Q'MT#:v~  % " '

W.P.NO.156'?7/2008  
BETWEEN: % M

1. Smt Savithramma,

W/0. Late Gunclu 

Aged abeut 72 Years, '   --  , "

R/ at : Yagati Village 8: P0_si, "   .  
Yagati & Hobli, Kadur Taklk,   "
Chikmagalur I_3iSf;1*éct.  " « 

2.. Sri Loki-ssh S'h3;:n1.21g_ 
S/0. Lazge Gund'u'.Rao,  
Aged abo':1i"38 Y:3_a}=-.§;- ' 
R/ at Yaga'€i«-.Vi1V!age_ 82 .P(23{',}
Yagati' &Hobli-, _K'c1dUE' TE1IL':kﬁ

 V. A_ Chiv}<i¥.1a1g§a1';;r I)iStri_Ci....Av .....PETE"FEONERrS

{mf :=;§~T_§':é;.: &
Sm? .K?Eg§;s'§z"'§{3g§T§z'EA}?2;.P'P. Ash.-rs. 5}

 QJVNE}: 

"  §§x&%<%a::§'..i_vs5% E-I'Eg.§iIEi%§'§1
 * .E{',;é,-§z12:€.a§;:;i ?<>':m3§° '§7raz";9,«::<1is:;sa§<>n
 C<:r§3~:}mi',§0:'3 L§n2i€.e(L

 Viforks Disziaion, Shimoga.

 MN.......,

kg



 

2 W.§'.N(). I 5('377f2(')i)§§

2. District. Magistrate,
Chikarnagalur - 577 10}:

(BY Sr: N.K. GUPTA Ac1v., FOR R1: V
Sri O.V1JAYAKUMAR, AGA ROR R21"

 REES PONI)_Ef\.IT"SV_' ;{ S7  

THIS WRIT PETITION 1S 1%'ILE£§4'V{Ji\'--{)ER .A"{?.?.'£'IC'LnE';'..iA?"vRV'V

226 8: 227 OF THE CONSTYi'U£"I0._N OR 1NE3IA..PE2g5,¥£1\?G
TO QUASH THE: ORDER PASSE}i)'E3Y TH'E1.'R'2g-3DEPU"i'Y
COMMISSIONER, DATED I7,_.1i1u.21f}Q8, '£3'II,EI)9 AS
ANNEXURE W A TO THE 'WRi'_i' PE*mf1O.R AND GRANT
SUCH OTHER WRIT OR "ORz>1§RiJON"'THE.FACTS AND
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASS' j   _ 

THIS WRIT':..:PETI'§%IO§§ff1SV "?(:'QMINC} ON FOR
HEARING. 'Z'H_1E3_  gfr*R_R <;OURT' MADE THE

¥'OLLOw1:§iG:_  1 " 

 pT:3t.iiiO:3é3'rS____§§:i:3 ihe. C}VJI1=E:'tI"S Of iand bearing

  Viliage, Yagati Habit Kadur Taiuk;

 C:fEi§{§.ia'§?f§E1§.§€:ﬂ?;i_§  }T§iSi3:.z"i<:t'., ?.'§1e §"€S§)OIEds';'fi'§§lS §'E'€}§3{}S$€§ £15:

 €:EYf€C?; t',(3:¥§2:9E5€<§Sw3 zmé. :3; in 11116 Eemd 53$.' E1153 p€:E.i%,£{:rR~3:'S SO?

 4A:i:¢;émr§:"§;'§;;--..pO'€;%;S:' §i§E€E?§, '"§"'§";z"~: §:*¢:3;3<>S€{% §}{.';'z.%-'€'.§' §§"§EE€:"'t§ £22 ﬂags:

 __§2mé ;Sf the pe'%é*z:§O:1erS ES Siaawzi in ihe Siiéitéth :i'3£E%:%€i aiémgg

VV   Ayith the Obje=ct.iO;1 S"{2n:er11€:1":tS éated 2.8.2009.

E



 

3 \\f_P.Z'~§U. E. 5{f?"z':'2(}(}%§

2. The peﬁitiorzer filed a suit, in O.S.98/

the file of Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.] Kaclur for 

injunction. The trial court granted temporary?"in_§j3n'€:t;10-:1

on 17.4.08. The respondents found

of an objection, they applied to*i_l"1e_V I)isi's*.ief EX/Eahg:ié§i:f{<3LT,eVVVfrjr removai of the ebStr'L1et.i§>_ns. Coﬁﬁhieeioner after hearing the pa:1*t:i.esv -for erection of towers in the Ie41;=;--d of :Armexure~A dated 17.E1.():_8--~. by the order have filed ;t}_1.:i..s

3. The Vepettitiefieﬁéé"«--.eeﬁtez1d that the locating of towers 2;md_d2*axvi:1g"0'f ptrwer lines in his iand is dame tie V".?,:ntiu}§%" fax}*0}é,:r' 'éhe adjoixzing landewnez". The power Einee &rai;a?rrj'__E:.}"i.E§e_Ea?{1::E" 0? {he petitmrzere are in the gig zexg ::n2m:3e:*.. %£.:?ﬁ'%,%':e @{}W'EiE'f:§ Einee are ciremfzz in the ezdjeizﬁng A7ié:V§:{E§ sthe %g§<::wer ii:';e:e e§:eu§;{£ have §',}§',€:"f3;§. 31:: 5-S'i',"E'E"i§§§':§', iéne, ._§f:; the ";§r<>eee5; 0?' érz3::ar§:1g {he pewezr Einee, 25 (fi{}€(}E3;E.'E'§", "yielding plants aye cut and I'€1'1'I'§OV€d' it is Submﬁteé 4 w.I>.No, 2 :s(:;77:2:)()s t.hai. f.h€I'€ is element. of dis;h<)z1e:st.y on the part of respondents in locating towers and drawing pov.rer lines in his land.

4. Respondent No.3. strenu.ous1y submittedv there: is no dishonesty or oblique motive on the respondent. The cou3"s<-3 of the power 1ir1e;:a..':f¢:nd~V.:t12e towe1"-5; now installed as per Ex.R1(i:}__is:_-ihéé oniy.' root causing n1in'imu1n damage<to..the tfeexss. V 'A A '

5. The counsel for the p_¢f;Vit,:o11.ors that Respondont N€)*. § iias*..vV"1«'n_e1d€_' false: and incorrect s1:ai;€ments"b_e4fore' The Respondent No.1 has given th;<;% 'iiagtos exligi oih.er part,icL11ars of eredioxz of towers .'VNo'$.«1'_€To 573$ '_u"r;,_d€r::--

1 -.z:V,o' ~E':§'Ff«.fY§§=§HN:S?»€§SSIO?§ LEE\£Ei, *§'om«::aS E='{}EE'€\E§};%.'I'§@?\E \ ;'3§§'2.."'s%;:§;_,S g:.o:%s:é;':'%%L3€':':oN oz' no K2---' Sfii LENE-1' om {EEC f;°~o:a::2§éf$ ..;1*'E%;o.;i/ii' ::s::;1.: go-* 3:3 mo;x':_': TS EE£};":': SE3 5:3' Au33E{'%?{i,s3J§}%€}§«i§;EZ non; £3': ET}§S'EZ5a;"£C:Ei <>:%?- §i3;~«:5:3.§ §z_E?;::?§_;:%:{:"§*::x.zo _ «S'§£X'§'EMEN'E' oz?' E3:'%Rf?ICULz'%RS 9%" E'RE:C'E'EON on .f§"ox§€::RS 2 TO 5 AN?) no RNESHENG 'E'HE".1 S'§''AGE~:S:

;, E K E ,/ E ':_".,mg~';""

= 5 B5 ",7 'ﬁr-':133?'«E(}; 15(>'??.:"2(}(}E<. situate in the adjoining lands and 2 legs are situate in the land of the petitioners. The ciraxsvmg of power iineenie caused with great caution and minimum dar;1e;geV'*ie. CEtU.S€d to the land of the petitioner. The aliegetioo M malafides and oblique motives aE1.eg:5dAAei'e« de«nied.At;§i$. 31155 It and ungtenable. > _ A

8. On thorough e0nsioe1:et:'2--on that every thing is not f2ei3iV_'wit1r1"'the'fieeggoneitefit in locating towers and 't in zig zag manner. The "}1av'e been drawn in the straight lthe 'lfirids. The excuse that the power lines atree dvrawn iolihe zig zag manner to avoid the 't*oWet._'"'1i:2eS ,1"£,1I1IV'1'Vi1"z*"?--«"C}£--'*€i' tesidentiai area, eoﬁe et h--osg:;{te;teAet.e;;:v"isT'fe1se and untenable because the said ' ht = buildttatggs ere"e_:t{tate heyend tower No.5: and éo net eotne ..fe:ithin teeter EYGSA3 and 4.

Ete a fact that that power it:/tee are elteeéy ____"ti':°aie1'1 in the Eanﬁ of petitioners and 25 coconut treee are 8 '~év'_§'.l\'C}. l 5-€i??'f2(l{}E€ cut, the sit.uatie:)r1 appears to be irrevereible even if the power lines are drawn in the adjoining lands. Necessetfily there should have been damage to the e0c0nut_t1_feeS'ééiigl the adjoining land. The damage t0 the Coedtqztztvl' ' either way was inevitable. Therefore, vit":l:"1_a'y notjvgist and proper at this length sf time tevétlieturb tl1.é:Aleeatl'et:"vl 'V of power lines and 'towers. 'l'he""t'{§:eltiti0I1e':%;eV_ 'lA;e$veicerVVVa're entitled to seek eompenjsationll"t;Q--f*:'fth.el"damage "eaused under the Telegraphs Act' H ll 1G. l--"hei';2,.I'a<% i*esp0'ndentt haeétssessed the damage Caused. to7._25'lcor:eiii;:~t.Mt:ieMS'slair; 51 Sum of Rs.1lQ3,'705/~. Now that alt;m1St'v 3'§feé{re"lttave lapsed? at this length of d;:.'ii%;e..e_t.he 'petlt-tenets E0 appmaeh District Court ta 'e:i?hazj;C:e:i1e'I':t:Vef Cemgeneatien Weuld net be gust and §2'{}§e:fl"lThe §':;.j.f§men't ef eempeneatien under the land

-.l_l.l'_j~..«.§'\;sﬁ§u'iSit£ee;':. Act 13 Ve:r'}?' well eettleﬁ by the juﬁieiai ef thie C{}'%,§.E'°E'. and Szzpreme €:}u:*t.= "ﬁle 253 '""--.eeee5nut trees have cut. The area: 0? 25 eeeemgt, téreee ii 9 9 W. P. E 5{)?'7l'2{%{?E% would be 1,/2 acre land. In the present. case, the respondents are not acquired the land. The}: have only made an aria} encroachment over the land, which' not permit the petitioners to grow fruit bearingddﬁxtll' T' The width of the land over which idineis: ua}%?eVij{ j_ is about 20 feet and running ali _thr0u._sg?iw.¥,I:1e A'fr0ff:n"~ V one end to anether end of ihé'e».}derderV"ef ddfiaﬁd inf the petitioners. The area eve-1% which pevvﬁ-'rem? lines rim over is also marginal and of 3. §aV;3;1'rQ\-ii_Vx:\{id1:}'1.fd N9 trope can be grown e0nveme:_itj1y}_;.e.d-Thefefme, {he stretch of 20 feet width frond x()if:e...g:nd efthe .b.O1'de.r to the an0t}'1e'r end of the bo}:.der_ $0. petitioners had become unviabie fer x'c:«uu1t£x-*aié.QnA._3;;":d" t';:::» be kept as a fallow land. __.The Caiﬁﬁentioza E'§r"£..E;'§I.K.'{}upt:a that: petﬁioners can grew 'v.f0<;{i'.ef::;pe.AQ':ji";s:;1"'Ei<:LzE%.uraZ empe is LmE:e:':23bEe Eyeeauee {he s,=s?%;§S_,';t§2i§:2:i;:a:§ £53 smaii, the sshadow of "she. czzaécémzé. f:":}}r;.é:s._ en ,e,§%;E*;:;==:" eide *:%;"{}?_:1;::3; zzsazéie {he Eaxrad ééjifiiﬁéﬁii *e.:n<?:1§t.'i°§-*:3'd1e for {dad crepe and hor'{.£c:3.E§.1:r21E erdpsg. aliewedé :1: 93111, "

:31": x T 1 Q \;vp}->.§~5<>, 2 5:<;7;':<_:<:25«:

11. Keeping in View the principles for determinatican sf compensation u'ndr3}:' I,e1n<:1 AcqL1isii*i"e.:1 Act, the yield per tme shnuld bi"? taken as 300 per year and rafie per coconut: is at R35/w. '1'h€4-.3-raiizgxsa bf" "

rate per tree is Rs.1..500/--. For 25 t.f"e'c:S.7.it: -:\.v<3__i1E<;£._bé Rs.37}5OO/--5 The 10 rnmtipiipezf xxri4Ii..p;1--g3p1y,p»',7§f§iAé' 'V compensation would be m market: value of 12%, 1.§1nd._intervé§Sf, vai; 9% from 7111.08 till payment. H '» in the }_ighAt' <:sf.t;_}ie intimated abovea, Misc.Civi1 No.9088/2010' is of and wait petition is We 333$;

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court