IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.42148/2018 (GM – KEB) BETWEEN:
THIPPESWAMY S/O SANNA MARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS AGRICULTURIST, R/AT P.D.KOTE VILLAGE, DHARMAPURA HOBLI, HIRIYUR TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 129 ... PETITIONER [BY SRI M.T.JAGAN MOHAN, ADV.] AND:
1 . BANGALORE ELECTRIC SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED, REP BY MANAGING DIRECTOR, KAVERI BHAVANA, K.G.ROAD, BANGALORE-1.
2 . THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELECL) BESCOM, MAJOR WORKS DIVISION, KPTCL, 3RD FLOOR, J.C.R. EXTENSION, 3RD CROSS, (EAST), CHITRADURGA-577 5O1.
3 . ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (EAST) BESCOM HIRIYUR SUB DIVISION, HIRIYUR-577 129 …RESPONDENTS [BY SRI H.V.DEVARAJU, ADV.] THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND AWARD DATED 15.11.2017 PASSED BY THE 1ST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA IN CIVIL MISC.NO.508/2016 VIDE ANNEXURE-A.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R The petitioner has challenged the legality and correctness of the order and award dated 15.11.2017 passed by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga in Civil Misc.No.508/2016.
2. The petitioner had filed claim petition before the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- with interest at 24% per annum towards the crop damages and diminution value of the land due to drawing of 66/11 K.V. high-tension wire in the land of the petitioner by the respondents in 1 acre 04 guntas of land. The learned District Judge was pleased to pass the order awarding Rs.1,952/- towards the compensation claimed with interest at 6% per annum. Being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that Ex.P2 is the Crop Confirmation Letter which shows about the existence of areca nut trees in the land owned by the petitioner. It is submitted that arecanut and coconut crops can be grown only in the irrigated land and not in the dry lands. In terms of Ex.P3 – Valuation Certificate issued by the Sub- Registrar, Hiriyur, the market value of the land where the arecanut crops are grown is shown as Rs.4,30,000/- per acre. However, the learned District Judge has considered the land in question as dry land and determined the compensation which is ex-facie contrary to the material evidence placed on record.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents justifying the impugned order and award submitted that the learned District Judge has determined the compensation based on the Exs.P2 and P3. Hence, no interference is warranted.
5. I have carefully considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
6. The basis for determining the compensation is the documents placed on record by the petitioner Exs.P2 and P3. It is not in dispute that arecanut crop is grown in the land in question. Ex.P3 depicts the value of the land per acre where arecanut crop is grown as Rs.4,30,000/-. In view of the aforesaid, the matter requires re-consideration by the learned District Judge.
7. Hence, the order and award impugned dated 15.11.2017 are quashed. The matter is remitted to the learned District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga to re- consider the matter. The parties are at liberty to lead any additional evidence. The learned District and Sessions Judge shall consider the same and shall take a decision in accordance with law keeping in mind the exhibits referred to above and the judgment of this Court in the case of ‘THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KPTCL VS. DODDAKKA’ reported in ILR 2015 KAR 677, in an expedite manner.
The writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the above.
Sd/- JUDGE PMR