The Executive Engineer vs Sri Earaiah
2022 Latest Caselaw 11826 Kant

                          1




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

                       BEFORE

        THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI

     WRIT PETITION No.10237 OF 2020 (GM-KEB)

BETWEEN:

1.     THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
       MAJOR WORKS DIVISION
       K.P.T.C.L., KOTHITHOPU ROAD
       TUMAKURU TOWN
       TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 101.

2.     THE ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
       (ELE) MAJOR WORKS DIVISION - IV
       K.P.T.C.L., KOTHITHOPU ROAD
       TUMAKURU TOWN
       TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 101.
                                         ... PETITIONERS

(BY SMT.RAKSHITHA.D.J., ADVOCATE)

AND:

SRI.EARAIAH
S/O RANGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/AT: JANEHARR VILLAGE
KANDIKERE HOBLI
C.N.HALLI TALUK
TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 101.             ...RESPONDENT

(BY SRI.PATEL D.KAREGOWDA., ADVOCATE)
                                2




      THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING
CERTAIN RELIEFS.


      THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:

                           ORDER

Smt.Rakshitha.D.J., learned counsel for petitioners

has appeared through video conferencing.

Sri.Patel D.Karegowda., learned counsel for

respondent has appeared in person.

2. For the sake of convenience, the status of

parties is referred to as per their rankings before the Trial

Court.

The petitioner filed a petition in Civil

Misc.No.10026/2016 before the V Additional District and

Sessions Judge, Tiptur, and sought for enhanced

compensation.

It is stated that the petitioner is the owner of the

land bearing Survey 19/1P1 situated Janehar Village,

Kandikere Hobli, C.N.Halli Taluk, Tumakuru District. The

KPTCL has drawn 220/110 KV Electric Transmission Line

from Thimmanahalli to katrikehal Tapping Point which

passes through petitioner's land. It is said that they have

cut and removed trees and crops.

It is stated that the compensation paid is very

meager and the Authority has not adopted capitalization

method and adopted an unscientific method and the

compensation paid is not in accordance with the market

rate of the relevant year.

It is also stated that since there is a drawing up of

Electric Transmission Line over the land, there is

diminution of value of the land and hence, he prayed for

enhancement of compensation with interest.

After the issuance of the notice, the KPTCL filed

statement of objections. They admitted that they have

drawn 220/110 K.V Electric Transmission Line and which

passes through the petitioner's land. The compensation

awarded by the Authority is based on the report of the

Senior Assistant Director of Horticulture. Hence, the

compensation paid is just and proper. Accordingly, they

prayed for the dismissal of the petition.

The petitioner - Earaiah was examined as PW-1 and

produced 5 documents which were marked as Ex.P-1 to

P5. One Hanumanthrayappa was examined as RW-1 and

no documents are produced.

On the trial of the action, the Trial Court vide order

dated 24.07.2019 awarded compensation of Rs.3,72,170/-

(Rupees Three Lakh Seventy Two Thousand One Hundred

and Seventy only) with interest at the rate of 8% per

annum from the date of petition till the date of recovery.

It is this order which is challenged in this Writ

Petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of

India on various grounds as set out in the Memorandum of

Writ Petition.

4. Smt.Rakshitha.D.J., learned counsel submits

that the Trial Court erred in not appreciating the fact that

the KPTCL have paid the compensation based on the report

of the Senior Assistant Director of Horticulture

Department. He has assessed the compensation to be

paid on the formula and guidance issued by the

Government of Karnataka from time to time. The

compensation paid was just and proper. Hence, interfering

with the same by further enhancing the compensation has

resulted in causing great prejudice to the interest and right

of the Authority.

Next, she submitted that the aspect regarding cost

of cultivation has not been properly considered by the Trial

Court.

It is further submitted that this Court in various

judgments held that the cost of cultivation should be

calculated at 30%. Hence, the same needs interference.

Lastly, she submitted that learned Trial Judge erred

in not taking into consideration the vital and key facts that

the Authority have already paid the compensation and the

petitioner has received the same without any protest nor

has he filed any objections before the Horticulture

Department regarding assessment of valuation of the

trees. Hence, a grave error has committed by enhancing

the compensation and the award of 8% interest is totally

unsustainable in law. Accordingly, she submitted that

award of compensation requires modification and

therefore, submitted that the Writ Petition may be allowed.

5. Sri.Patel D.Karegowda., learned counsel has

urged several contentions and submits that the Trial court

in extnso referred to the material on record and passed the

award and the same does not require any interference.

Accordingly, he submits that the writ petition may be

dismissed.

6. Heard the contentions urged on behalf of the

parties and perused the Annexures with care.

7. The short question which arises for

consideration is whether the compensation awarded by the

Trial Court requires modification?

I have carefully perused the order passed by the

Trial Court. The award of amount in respect of Teak Trees

requires modification.

CALCULATION OF TEAK TREES:

There are 13 Teak Trees, the Trial Court has taken

Rs.30,000/- for one tree. The same requires to be modified

at Rs.25,000/- for one tree.

Therefore, 13 X 25,000 = Rs.3,25,000/-.

The compensation awarded in so far as other trees

are unaltered.

Hence, the re-assessed compensation is as under:

Teak Trees          - Rs.3,25,000/-

Neem Trees          - Rs.   3,500/-

Byala Trees - Rs.     4,000/-

Total               - Rs.3,32,500

Taking into consideration of the same, the claimant

is entitled for total compensation of Rs.3,32,500/- (Rupees

Three Lakh Thirty Two Thousand and Five Hundred only).

Counsel Smt.Rakshitha.D.J., submits that the

Authorities have paid a sum of Rs.25,330/- (Rupees

Twenty Five Thousand Three Hundred and Thirty only) at

the time of drawing up of the line.

Submission is noted. Therefore, the claimant is

entitled for balance compensation of Rs.3,07,170/-

(Rupees Three Lakh Seven Thousand One Hundred and

Seventy only) with interest at the rate of 6% per annum

from the date of petition till realization.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed in part.

The order dated:24.07.2019 passed by the Court of V

Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Tiptur in Civil

Misc.No.10026/2016 is modified holding that the claimant

is entitled for balance compensation of Rs.3,07,170/-

(Rupees Three Lakh Seven Thousand One Hundred and

Seventy only) with interest at the rate of 6% per annum

from the date of petition till realization.

The KPTCL Authority shall deposit the amount within

6 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this

order.

Sd/-

JUDGE

TKN