V.V.Jayaram vs Kerala State Electricity Board on 17 August, 2006
7. The contention of the Corporation that
the Government having fixed the fair value of the
property in that area, the court below could not
have fixed a higher value is liable to be
rejected since, while assessing the damage
sustained and fixing the compensation, the court
is not bound by the guidelines/orders issued by
the Government. The contention that the court
CRP No.41 of 2022
-9-
below committed an illegality in awarding 9%
interest cannot also be sustained in the light of
the decision of this Court in V.V. Jayaram v
Kerala State Electricity Board [2015 (3) KHC
453]. Having held so, I find a patent mistake in
the order, which is liable to be corrected in
exercise of this Court's revisional jurisdiction.
It is seen that initially the Corporation had
paid Rs.1,68,045/- towards the value of trees cut
alone and had refused to pay any amount towards
diminution in land value. As per the impugned
order, the court below rejected the claim for
enhancement of compensation towards value of
trees cut and awarded compensation towards
diminution in land value. Even though the court
below did not grant compensation for the value of
trees cut, the impugned order contains a
direction to deduct the compensation paid towards
value of trees cut from the enhanced compensation
awarded. This may be interpreted as a direction
CRP No.41 of 2022
-10-
to deduct the compensation towards value of trees
paid by the Corporation from the compensation
towards diminution in land value granted by the
court below. The impugned order, to that extent,
need to be corrected. Accordingly, the direction
in the impugned order to deduct the compensation
paid towards value of trees cut from the enhanced
compensation awarded is deleted. The
compensation awarded by the court below shall be
paid within three months, without any deduction.