Karnataka High Court
The Executive Engineer (Ele) vs Devaraju on 7 December, 2021
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.7432 OF 2020 (GM-KEB)
BETWEEN:
1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE)
MAJOR WORKS DIVISION
KPTCL, KOTHITHOPU ROAD
TUMAKURU TOWN
TUMAKURU DISTRICT
2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER(ELE)
MAJOR WORKS DIVISION-4
KPTCL, KOTHITHOPU ROAD
TUMAKURU TOWN
TUMAKURU DISTRICT
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI UTTUR PADMAVATHI SURESH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
DEVARAJU
S/O JAVAREGOWDA
R/O GUNGURMALE VILLAGE
NONAVINAKERE HOBLI
TIPTUR TALUK
TUMAKURU DISTRICT
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI D.P.PRASANNA AND
SRI K.R.SANTHOSHA, ADVOCATE)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
JUDGEMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE V TH ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT TIPTUR IN CIVIL MISC
NO.10024/2014 DTD: 24.11.2018 AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.
2
THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B'
GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
This petition is filed against the impugned
judgment and award dated 24.11.2018 passed by
the V Additional District & Sessions Judge, Tiptur
(for short "the Trial Court") in Civil Misc.
No.10024/2014 allowing the claim petition filed by
the respondent-claimant herein for enhancement of
the compensation awarded in favour of the
respondent by the petitioners-KPTCL.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioners and learned counsel for the
respondent and perused the material placed on
record.
3. In addition to reiterating the various
contentions urged in the petition and referring to
the documents produced by the petitioners, learned
counsel for the petitioners contends that this Court
in the case of The Executive Engineer
(Electrical) V/s. H.K. Ganganna
(W.P.No.45867/2019 disposed of on
16.11.2021) has held as under:
"This petition is filed against the impugned
judgment and award dated 30.11.2018 passed by
the Trial Court in Civil Misc. No.10023/2015 allowing
the claim petition filed by the respondent-claimant
herein for enhancement of the compensation
awarded in favour of the respondent by the
petitioners-KPTCL.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing
for the petitioners and perused the material placed
on record.
3. Inspite of service of notice to the
respondent-claimant, he has chosen to remain
unrepresented and not contested the petition.
4. In addition to reiterating the various
contentions urged in the petition and referring to the
documents produced by the petitioners as well as
the material placed on record, the learned counsel
for the petitioners submits that a perusal of the
impugned judgment and award will indicate that the
said judgment and award is contrary to the decision
of this Court in the case of the EXECUTIVE
ENGINEER, KPTCL AND ANOTHER VS.
DODDAKKA reported in ILR 2015 KAR 677 which
is followed in the subsequent decisions by the
Division Bench of this Court in the case of
KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION
CORPORATION LIMITED AND OTHERS vs
P.LAKKAPPA SWAMY in Writ Appeal Nos.2883-
2884/2014 dated 15.03.2019 and in the case of
SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER AND OTHERS vs
LAKSHMAIAH DEAD IS LRS in Writ Petition
No.49381/2016 dated 29.05.2019. It is therefore
submitted that the impugned judgment and award
allowing the claim of the respondent and awarding
exorbitant compensation is illegal and the same
deserves to be quashed.
5. After considering the submissions of
the learned counsel for the petitioners and upon
perusal of the material placed on record, it is clear
that the Trial Court has not properly appreciated the
pleadings and evidence of the parties apart from not
considering the decision of this Court in
DODDAKKA'S case and subsequent decisions
referred to supra.
6. Under these circumstances, without
expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits on
the rival contentions, I deem it just and proper to set
aside the impugned judgment and award passed by
the Trial Court and remit the matter to the Trial
Court for reconsideration afresh in accordance with
law bearing in mind the decision of this Court in
DODDAKKA'S case and subsequent decisions
referred to supra by giving one more opportunity to
the parties to put forth all their contentions before
the Trial Court including adducing additional oral
and documentary evidence in support of their
respective contentions.
7. In the result, I pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The petition is allowed;
(ii) The impugned judgment and award
dated 30.11.2018 passed by the V
Additional District and Sessions
Judge, Tiptur in Civil Misc.
No.10023/2015 is set aside and the
matter is remitted to the Trial Court
for reconsideration afresh in
accordance with law bearing in
mind the decision of this Court in
the case of DODDAKKA and
subsequent decisions referred to
supra;
(iii) Liberty is reserved in favour of the
petitioners as well as the
respondent to adduce additional
oral and documentary evidence in
support of their respective
contentions;
(iv) All rival contentions on merits are
kept open and no opinion is
expressed on the same."
4. As rightly contended by learned counsel for the
petitioners that the issue in controversy is squarely covered
by the aforesaid order passed in W.P.No.45867/2019
disposed of on 16.11.2021.
5. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the
following:
ORDER
(i) The petition is allowed;
(ii) The impugned judgment and decree
dated 24.11.2018 passed by the V
Additional District & Sessions Judge,
Tiptur, in Civil Misc. No.10024/2014
is set aside and the matter is
remitted back to the Trial Court for
reconsideration afresh in accordance
with law, bearing in mind, the
decision of this Court in the case of
DODDAKKA and subsequent
decisions referred to supra in
W.P.No.45867/2019 (DD:16.11.2021);
(iii) Liberty is reserved in favour of the
petitioners as well as the respondent
to adduce additional oral and
documentary evidence in support of
their respective contentions;
(iv) All rival contentions on merits are
kept open and no opinion is
expressed on the same.
SD/-
JUDGE
Bmc
