IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA WP NO.853/2019 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN:
1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL) MAJOR WORKS DIVISION, KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LTD., OFFICE AT :
OLD ZILLA PANCHAYATH OFFICE BUILDING, TUMAKURU 2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL) NO.2, MAJOR WORKS DIVISION, KPTCL, OFFICE AT OLD ZILLA PANCHAYATH OFFICE, TUMAKURU (BY SMT. SHUBHA S., ADVOCATE) AND SRI YAJAMAN SANJEEVAIAH, S/O. HANUMAIAH, A/A 55 YEARS, R/A LAKKENAHALLI, GOLLARAHATTI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK, TUMKUR-572 216 (SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED) ... PETITIONERS ... RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD. 06.02.2016 IN MIS. NO.171/2014 PASSED BY THE I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, TUMAKURU VIDE ANNEXURE-A.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited is before this Court challenging the judgment and award passed by the I Additional District & Sessions Judge, Tumkur in Mis.No.171/2014 dated 06.02.2016 whereby total compensation of Rs.7,25,000/- with interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of petition till realization has been awarded for the utilization of the lands by the KPTCL in drawing high tension circuit electricity lines.
2. The respondent-claimant is the owner of land bearing Sy.No.53 of Chikkanettagunte Village, Kasaba Hobli, Gubbi Taluk, Tumkur District. On utilization of the said land for drawing high tension circuit electricity line, the KPTCL has paid meager compensation for causing damages to the land including the cutting of trees.
3. Being aggrieved, the claimant had preferred Misc.No.171/2014 before the I Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Tumakuru. The learned District Judge has enhanced the compensation to Rs.7,25,000/- with interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. Being aggrieved, KPTCL is before this Court mainly on the ground that the cost of cultivation determined by the learned District Judge is on the higher side. Reliance is placed on the judgment of this Court in the case of the Executive Engineer, KPTCL Vs. Doddakka reported in ILR 2015 Kar 677.
4. Learned counsel for the KPTCL would submit that the cost of cultivation determined has to be reduced to 30% in conformity with the order of this Court in Doddakka’s case.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that no diminution value of land has been awarded by the learned District Judge. Learned counsel has placed reliance on the Cognate Bench decision of this Court in the case of D.K.Thimmanna Vs. Executive Engineer passed in W.P.No.40344/12 c/w W.P.No.40343/12 (D.D.31.7.2017).
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material on record, it is pertinent to note that no reasons have been recorded by the learned District Judge to determine the cost of cultivation at Rs.100/- per coconut tree and Rs.20/- per arecanut tree. Similarly it would be appropriate for the learned District Judge to award compensation considering the parameters set down by this court in D.K.Thimmanna’s case, supra.
7. In the circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate to set aside the order impugned dated 06.02.2016 at Annexure-A and remand the matter to the learned District Judge to re-consider the matter in the light of the orders of this Court in Doddakka and Thimmanna’s case referred to above. All the rights and contentions of the parties are left open. Parties are at liberty to lead additional evidence, if any. The learned District Judge shall consider the matter afresh and take a decision in the light of the observations made hereinabove, in accordance with law in an expedite manner. Ordered accordingly.
8. Writ petition stands disposed of in terms of above.
Sd/- JUDGE Sbs*