Monday, 18, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Varghese Paul vs Power Grid Corporation Of India
2024 Latest Caselaw 15551 Ker

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 15551 Ker
Judgement Date : 6 June, 2024

Kerala High Court

Varghese Paul vs Power Grid Corporation Of India on 6 June, 2024

Author: V.G.Arun

Bench: V.G.Arun

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
   THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 16TH JYAISHTA, 1946
                        CRP NO. 515 OF 2018
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 28.11.2017 IN OPELE NO.91 OF
         2011 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, NORTH PARAVUR
REVISION PETITIONER/S:

            VARGHESE PAUL
            AGED 49 YEARS
            AGED 49, S/O.POULOSE, KANIYANKUDY HOUSE, CHOORAKKOD
            KARA, PATTIMATTOM VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNAD TALUK,
            ERNAKULAM-683 562.
            BY ADVS.
            SRI.K.C.ELDHO
            SRI.ANEESH JAMES
            SRI.JIJO THOMAS
            SRI.MALLENATHAN.M.
            SMT.K.SINDHU ELIAS


RESPONDENT/S:

    1       POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA
            CONSTRUCTION AREA OFFICE, MAVELIPURAM COLONY,
            KAKKANAD, COCHIN-682 030.
    2       SPECIAL TAHSILDAR LA
            POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.,CHEVARAMBALAM,
            KOZHIKODE-17.

OTHER PRESENT:

            SR.GP.V.TEKCHAND


        THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
27.05.2024, ALONG WITH CRP.769/2019, THE COURT ON 06.06.2024
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 CRP Nos.515/2018 & 769/2019

                                  -2-




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
    THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 16TH JYAISHTA, 1946
                         CRP NO. 769 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 28.11.2017 IN OPELE NO.91 OF
2011 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, NORTH PARAVUR
REVISION PETITIONER/S:

             THE POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD
             CONSTRUCTION AREA OFFICE, MAVELIPURAM COLONY,
             KAKKANAD, COCHIN-682030.
             BY ADV ROJO J.THURUTHIPARA


RESPONDENT/S:

     1       VARGHESE PAUL
             AGED 57 YEARS
             S/O.POULOSE, KANIYANKUDY HOUSE, CHOORAKKOD KARA,
             PATTIMATTAM VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNAD TALUK-683562.
     2       SPECIAL THASILDHAR, (LA),
             POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., CHEVARAMBALAM,
             KOZHIKODE-673017.
             BY ADVS.
             SRI.K.C.ELDHO
             SRI.MALLENATHAN.M.


OTHER PRESENT:

             SR.GP.V.TEKCHAND


         THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
27.05.2024, ALONG WITH CRP.515/2018, THE COURT ON 06.06.2024
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 CRP Nos.515/2018 & 769/2019

                                     -3-



                                  ORDER

Dated this the 06th day of June, 2024

These revision petitions are filed

challenging the order passed by the Additional

District Judge, North Paravur in O.P.

(Electricity) No.91 of 2011. The original

petition was filed by the revision petitioner in

CRP No.515 of 2018 (hereinafter called 'the

claimant'), being dissatisfied with the

compensation awarded towards the damage and loss

sustained due to the drawing of 400 KV lines

across his property by the Power Grid Corporation

of India Ltd (hereinafter called 'the

Corporation'). The essential facts are as under;

According to the claimant, he is in ownership

and possession of landed property having an

extent of 12.47 Ares comprised in Re-Sy.Nos.304/2

in Block No.27 of Pattimattom Village in

Kunnathunadu Taluk. The land was cultivated with CRP Nos.515/2018 & 769/2019

various yielding and non-yielding trees. In order

to facilitate drawing of lines for the smooth

transmission of power, large number of trees were

cut from the claimant's property. The drawing of

high tension lines rendered the land underneath

and adjacent to the lines useless, resulting in

diminution of the value of the property. In spite

of the huge loss suffered, only meagre amount was

paid to the claimant as compensation for the loss

sustained. Hence, the original petition was

filed, seeking enhanced compensation towards the

value of trees cut and diminution of land value.

2. Heard Adv.K.C.Eldho for the claimant and

Adv.Millu Dandapani for the Corporation.

3. A perusal of the impugned order shows

that the court below has assessed the loss

sustained due to cutting of yielding areca palm

by reckoning the total yield from each palm, the

weight of nuts after drying and the price of

dried nuts. Based on such assessment, the net CRP Nos.515/2018 & 769/2019

income was fixed after deducting the immature

falling and expenses. For reckoning the

compensation amount payable, 8 was taken as the

multiplier. Further, the court below fixed the

compensation for cutting of cashew tree and

other valuable trees based on the assessment made

by the Commissioner. Being so, this Court finds

the procedure adopted by the court below to be

just and proper.

4. A perusal of the impugned order shows

that, for the purpose of fixing the compensation

towards diminution in land value, the court below

relied on Ext.A2 sale deed as well as Ext.C1 and

C1(l) commission report and plan. On

consideration of the evidence on record, the land

value was fixed at Rs.2,50,000/- per cent and

awarded 50% of the land value as compensation for

the affected area admeasuring 2.30 Ares (5.68

cents). Accordingly, the claimant was found

entitled to compensation of Rs.7,77,600/- with CRP Nos.515/2018 & 769/2019

interest at the rate of 8% per annum.

5. On careful scrutiny of the impugned

order, it is seen that the compensation payable

towards diminution in land value was fixed based

on factors like situs of the land, the extent to

which the land is adversely affected and

consequent diminution in the value of the land,

as laid down by the Apex Court in KSEB v. Livisha

[(2007) 6 SCC 792]. Similarly, the discretion

vested with the court was properly exercised by

awarding 50% of the land value as compensation

for the land affected due to the drawing of

electric lines.

6. The contention of the Corporation that

the Government having issued guidelines for

fixation of the land value, the court below ought

to have fixed the value in accordance with the

same is liable to be rejected since the court is

not bound by the guidelines/orders issued by the

Government while fixing the compensation. The CRP Nos.515/2018 & 769/2019

contention that the court below committed an

illegality by awarding interest at the rate of 8%

per annum being without merit, is also liable to

be rejected. As such, I find no reason to

interfere with the well considered order of the

court below, rendered after taking all relevant

factors into consideration.

For the aforementioned reasons, the civil

revision petitions filed by the claimant as well

as the Corporation are dismissed. The enhanced

compensation fixed by the court below shall be

paid within three months of receipt of a copy of

this order. If any amount is deposited pursuant

to the order of this Court or otherwise, the same

shall forthwith be released to the claimant on

his filing appropriate application.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN JUDGE Scl/

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter