Karnataka High Court
The Executive Engineer (Electrical) vs Sri Basavaraju on 28 June, 2024
Author: N S Sanjay Gowda
Bench: N S Sanjay Gowda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:24282
WP No. 6756 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
WRIT PETITION NO. 6756 OF 2020 (GM-KEB)
BETWEEN:
1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL),
MAJOR WORKS DIVISION,
K.P.T.C.L., KOTHI THOPU ROAD,
TUMAKURU TOWN,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL)
MAJOR WORKS DIVISION IV
K.P.T.C.L, KOTHITHOPU ROAD,
TUMAKURU TOWN,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SHUBHA S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. BASAVARAJU,
Digitally S/O. NINGE GOWDA,
signed by
KIRAN AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
KUMAR R R/O. MARASANDRA VILLAGE,
Location: KASABA HOBLI,
HIGH
COURT OF CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK,
KARNATAKA TUMAKURU DIST,
TUMKUR - 572 114.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. PATEL D KARE GOWDA., ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION, TO QUASH THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 11.12.2018 IN MIS.NO.10024/2015 PASSED BY
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:24282
WP No. 6756 of 2020
THE V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, TIPTUR
(ANNEXURE-A).
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. This petition is filed challenging the award of
enhanced compensation of Rs.19,22,984/- with interest at
the rate of 8% per annum by the District and Sessions
Judge, Tiptur.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
contends that there are two errors in the order. She
submits that the District Judge had committed an error in
taking the yield of coconuts per tree as '180', which ought
to be taken as '150'. She further states that the value of
the neem trees has been taken at 'Rs.15,000/-', which
ought to be taken at 'Rs.13,000/-', for which she has
placed reliance on the order passed by this Court in W.P.
No.12477/2021, where this Court has reduced the value of
the neem trees from Rs.15,000/- to Rs.13,000/-.
NC: 2024:KHC:24282
3. She also submits that the calculation error in para 36
of the impugned judgment insofar as it relates to
calculating the value of the 44 neem trees, she submits
that if the value of the neem trees is to be accepted at
Rs.15,000/-, for 44 neem trees the sum awarded should
have been 'Rs.6,60,000/-' and not 'Rs.13,20,000/-'.
4. In my view, the first two arguments that there were
errors in respect of the yield of coconuts per tree and
regarding the value of the neem trees cannot be accepted.
5. In my view, the District Judge has exercised its
discretion in coming to the conclusion that the average
yield of a coconut tree was '180'. This is obviously having
regard to the fact that the coconut trees that are grown in
Chikkanayakanalli Taluk do yield a higher number of
coconuts as compared to other taluks.
6. The second argument that the value of the neem
trees ought to be 'Rs.13,000/-' as has been accepted by
this Court, cannot also be accepted.
NC: 2024:KHC:24282
7. This court, in the aforementioned petition, in the
factual context of the case, modified the value of the neem
trees at 'Rs.13,000/-'. This Court has not determined that
the value of the neem trees should be 'Rs.13,000/-' in all
cases.
8. In my view, the Trial Court after taking into
consideration that the estimated valuation made by the
Range Forest Officer which was for the year 2001-02 and
taking into consideration that the trees fell in the year
2014-15, the determination of value at Rs.15,000/- cannot
be found fault with. Consequently, the valuation made by
the Trial Court insofar as it relates to the yield of the
coconut trees and the value of the neem tree is accepted.
9. However, it is noticed that the District Judge has, in
fact, committed an error in arriving at the total value of
the 44 neem trees. If the value of the neem trees is to be
accepted as 'Rs.15,000/-' for the 44 neem trees, the
amount payable would only be 'Rs.6,60,000/-' and not
'Rs.13,20,000/-'. Hence, to that extent, the amount of
NC: 2024:KHC:24282
'Rs.13,20,000/-' found in para 36 of the impugned
judgment is substituted with the figure 'Rs.6,60,000/-'.
10. In all other respects, the award of the District Judge
is confirmed. The amounts shall be recalculated by taking
into consideration that the value of the neem trees would
be 'Rs.6,60,000/-' and the entire compensation shall be
paid accordingly. Amounts, if any, paid shall also be given
due deduction. Subject to the above, Writ Petition is
dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
HNM
