The right of user in land having an extent of 9.731 cents situated in Sy.No.173 of Kannambra-I Village belonging to the first respondent was acquired under the provisions of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (Act No.50 of 1962) (‘the Act’ for short). The first respondent filed claim for compensation before the competent authority under the Act for the damages sustained by him. Dissatisfied with the award of the competent authority claiming enhancement the first respondent filed O.P.148/2002 before the court of the District Judge, Palakkad. The court below enhanced the compensation. The requisitioning authority (Petronet CCK Ltd.) assails the order of the District Judge by filing the revision petition.
2. I heard the counsel appearing for the revision petitioner. There is no appearance for the first respondent.
3. The competent authority considered the claim of the first respondent and considering the age and nature of the 6 rubber trees categorized them as fire wood and awarded an amount of Rs.268/- per tree thus totalling to Rs.1,608/-.
4. The District Judge by treating the firewood trees as yielding trees refixed the compensation as awarded for yielding trees. This is assailed by the counsel for the revision petitioner.
5. A close perlustration of the impugned order would show that the District Judge has enhanced the amount on mere guess work. The view taken by the District Judge is that since all the rubber trees were planted by the same person at the same time, the non-yielding trees can be valued treating it as yielding using the parameter used for the yielding rubber trees. In compensation matters, the Court is bound to make an independent assessment on the basis of the evidence adduced. I am also conscious of the fact that in compensation matters an element of guess work is good.
But the same should have some nexus to the evidence available on record. I find that the approach made by the District Court is liable to be interfered with. Considering the facts of the case and for the reason the first respondent should be adequately compensated I refix the compensation at Rs.536/- per tree thus totalling to Rs. 3,216/-.
Accordingly the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of modifying the impugned order as follows. The total compensation payable on account of cutting 6 non-yielding rubber trees is refixed as Rs.3,216/-. The first respondent is entitled to the balance amount of Rs.1,608/-. The same shall carry an interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Petition in the court below. The balance amount quantified as above shall be disbursed by the revision petitioner within four months from today. There is no order as to costs.
DCS V.CHITAMBARESH JUDGE