Kerala High Court
Power Grid Corporation Of India Ltd vs P.A. Parameswaran Pillai on 8 March, 2012
Author: K.T.Sankaran
Bench: K.T.Sankaran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN
THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF MARCH 2012/18TH PHALGUNA 1933
CRP.No. 575 of 2008 ( )
-----------------------
OPEA.141/2000 of ADDL.DISTRICT COURT,KOTTAYAM
REVISION PETITIONER(S)/ADDL. 3RD RESPONDENT:
-------------------------------------------
POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
G/S CHOOLATHERVU.P.O, HARIPAD, ALAPPUZHA.
BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER:
-------------------------
P.A. PARAMESWARAN PILLAI,
NADUVILEPARAMBU, POOVANTHURUTHU.P.O,
PANACHIKKAD.
BY ADV. SRI.P.NARAYANAN
THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
08-03-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
--------------------------------
C.R.P.No.575 of 2008
---------------------------------
Dated this the 8th day of March, 2012
O R D E R
For drawing a 220 KV electric line, trees were cut and removed from the property belonging to the respondent. 139 rubber trees and other trees were cut and removed. The Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. awarded a compensation of ` 1,52,525/-. No amount was granted by the Corporation as compensation for diminution of land value. Dissatisfied with the compensation awarded, the respondent filed O.P.(E.A.) No.141 of 2000 before the court of the Additional District Judge, Kottayam. The respondent claimed a sum of ` 4 lakhs as additional compensation for the trees cut and claimed a sum of ` 3 lakhs (claim limited) as compensation for diminution of land value. However, he limited his claim in all to ` 4 lakhs as enhanced compensation.
2. Before the court below, the claimant was C.R.P.No.575/2008 2 examined as PW1. No oral evidence was adduced by the Corporation. Exhibits A1, A2, B1, C1 and C1(a) were marked in the case.
3. The court below held that the yield, age and future age of the trees adopted by the Corporation are liable to be accepted. The Corporation computed compensation taking 40% of the gross yield as the net yield. The court below held that 75% of the gross yield can be taken as the net yield. Thus the court below fixed the enhanced compensation for the trees cut at ` 1,82,902/- in addition to the amount already awarded. I am of the view that the court below was not justified in taking 25% of the gross yield for expenses. Consistently, this Court has taken 40% of the gross yield as expenses for rubber cultivation. Therefore, that part of the order passed by the court below fixing the compensation for the trees cut taking 75% of the gross yield as net yield is liable to be interfered with.
4. The court below fixed the land value at ` 8,000/- per cent and taking 20% of the market value as the diminution of land C.R.P.No.575/2008 3 value, a sum of ` 80,000/- was awarded as compensation for diminution of land value. A sum of ` 32,000/- was awarded for the extent of 4 cents covered by a tower. In several other connected cases arising out of similar cases where 220 KV line is involved, ` 8,000/- was taken as the value of the land. I do not find any ground to interfere with the compensation fixed by the court below as compensation for diminution of land value.
5. The court below awarded interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition. The interest is not excessive. In fact interest is payable from the date of tree cutting. However, since the claimant has not filed a revision, no change need be made in respect of the interest awarded.
For the aforesaid reasons, the order passed by the court below in so far as it relates to the enhancement of compensation for the trees cut is modified to the extent that, instead of 75% of the gross income as the net profit for the rubber trees, 60% shall be taken as the net profit. The court below shall re-fix the compensation accordingly. In all other respects, the order passed C.R.P.No.575/2008 4 by the court below is confirmed. The parties shall appear before the court below on 10.4.2012.
K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl