IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. PANDIT CRP No.276/2017 BETWEEN:
M/S WIND WORLD (INDIA) LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. ENERCON INDIA LTD.,) A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF COMPANIES ACT, 1956 PRESENTLY REGISTERED OFFICE AT PLOT NO.33, DAMAN PATALIA ROAD BHIMPORE, DAMAN-396210.
(BY SRI.MADHUKAR DESHPANDE, ADV.) AND:
1. SMT. RATHNAMMA W/O V VISHNU AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS OCCUPATION:HOUSEWIFE & AGRICULTURIST R/AT SRIRAMA NILAYA KOTE MAIN ROAD KAMANABAVI EXTENSION CHITRADURGA TOWN.
2. KPTCL CORPORATE OFFICE KAUVERI BHAVANA BENGALURU-560009 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR ...PETITIONER 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER KPTCL, BRHUTH KAMAGARI VIBHAGA SUB-DIVISION-1, JCR EXTENSION 3RD CROSS, 1ST FLOOR CHITRADURGA.
4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER KPTCL, BRHUTH KAMAGARI VIBHAGA SUB-DIVISION-1, JCR EXTENSION 3RD CROSS, 1ST FLOOR CHITRADURGA.
(BY SRI.M.T. JAGAN MOHAN, ADV. FOR R1 SRI ASHOK N PATIL, ADV. FOR SMT. PADMA S UTTAR, ADV. FOR R2 R3 & R4 – SERVED & UNREPRESENTED) …RESPONDENTS THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 09.12.2016 PASSED IN CIVIL MISC.107/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SPL, 2ND ADDL. DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION.
THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 9.12.2016 passed in Civil Miscellaneous No.107/2014 on the file of Court of Special II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga.
2. The petitioner herein was the 4th respondent therein and respondent No.1 was the petitioner therein. Respondents 2 to 4 herein are respondents 2 to 4 therein.
3. For the sake of convenience the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Court below.
4. The petitioner filed application under Section 16(3) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 claiming compensation for the land utilised by the respondents 1 to 3 belonging to the petitioner for erection of high tension power line (for short 'the HTPL') in Survey No.170/2 of Madakaripura Village, Kasaba Hobli, Chitradurga.
5. On issuance of notice respondents 1 to 3 appeared before the court and filed their objections contending that they are not liable to pay compensation and stated that the agency which has drawn the HTPL is responsible to pay the compensation. Though respondent No.4 - petitioner herein appeared through their counsel failed to file any objection. The petitioner examined himself as PW.1 and got marked the documents Exs.P1 to P.7. Respondents 1 to 3 got marked Ex.R1 - the conditions of synchronization of power agreement with KPTCL Grid from private generations. Based on the material on record, the trial Court framed the following points for consideration :-
"1. Whether petitioner is entitled for damages/compensation under the head of decrease of value of the land in view of the installation of power line/tower?
2. If petitioner is entitled for compensation, what is the quantum of compensation ?
3. What order ?"
The Trial Court on examination of the material on record answered points 1 and 2 in the affirmative and awarded compensation of Rs.3.00 Lakhs directing the 4th respondent to pay the same with interest at 8% p.a. to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondent No.4 - petitioner herein is before this Court in this revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the entire material on record.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is not liable to pay any compensation to the petitioner therein as it is not the agency which has drawn the HTPL over the petitioners land in Sy.No.170/2 of Madakaripura, Kasaba Hobli, Chitradurga Taluk. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that as he could not file objections, he seeks an opportunity to file objections and to contest the petition.
8. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 3 - KPTCL would submit that the agency which has drawn the HTPL is M/s. Vestas Wind Technology Private Limited and not M/s. Enercon India Limited, which is now changed to M/s. Wind World India Limited. Learned counsel for respondents 1 to 3 further submits that one G. Krishnappa, Executive Engineer has filed affidavit to that effect.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner - claimant states that the petitioner/claimant is the owner of land in Sy.No.170/2 of Madakaripura Village, Kasaba Hobli, Chitradurga and respondents No.1 to 3 have utilised land in Sy No.170/2, to an extent of 1 acre to erect HTPL. The petitioner used to grow maize, onion and other crops in the said land. The trial Court passed the order based on the material on record and on the information furnished by respondents 1 to 3 therein - KPTCL. Respondent No.4 / petitioner herein failed to file any objection before the trial Court and it is not open for the respondent No.4 to contend otherwise in this revision petition.
10. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view, that the impugned order came to be passed solely because the 4th respondent failed to file objections and failed to bring to the notice of the Court that they are not the agency which erected the HTPL and it is M/s. Vestas Wind Technology Pvt. Ltd., which erected the HTPL. Respondents 1 to 3 failed to furnish the details with regard to agency which had drawn the HTPL on the petitioners land in Sy.No.170/2 of Madakaripura, Kasaba Hobli, Chitradurga Taluk. If the respondents 1 to 3 had furnished proper information in their statement before the trial court, the impugned order would not have been passed by the trial Court. Respondents 1 to 3 through one Sri. Krishnappa, the Executive Engineer have filed affidavit dated 28/2/2018 before this court. Paragraph 3 of which reads as follows.
"M/s. Vestas Wind Technology Private Limited, N.H. 13, Ward No.32, 5th Block, 3rd Cross, Kanaka Nagar, Near : Thara Mandala, Chitradurga 577 501, the Hightension line run in the disputed Survey No.170/2 of Madakaripura Village, Kasaba Hobli, Chitradurga Taluk is belonging to M/s. Vestas Wind Technology Private Limited.”
11. As the above affidavit states that the HTPL is drawn by M/s. Vestas Wind Technology Private Limited in Sy.No.170/2, Madakaripura Village, Kasaba Hobli, Chitradurga Taluk, the petitioner has to implead the said agency to seek appropriate relief. To provide an oppurtunity to the Respondent No.4/petitioner herein to contest the petition by filing objection and to provide an opportunity to implead the agency, which has drawn the HTPL on the land of the petitioner herein, the matter requires to be remanded to the Trial Court.
12. Accordingly, Civil Revision Petition is remanded to the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, by setting aside the order dated 9.12.2016 passed in Misc.No.107/2014. The 4th respondent/ petitioner herein shall pay cost of Rs.10,000/- to the petitioner and respondent Nos.1 to 3 shall also pay cost of Rs.10,000/- before the trial Court to the petitioner/respondent No.1 herein for the mistake committed by respondents 1 to 3 i.e., furnishing of improper information to the trial Court. If they had provided proper information which they have furnished before this Court through affidavit dated 28.02.2018, the present impugned order would not have been passed and there was no occasion for the petitioner herein to approach this Court. Thus the petition is allowed and the matter is remanded to the trial Court for fresh consideration by providing an opportunity to all the concerned.
Sd/- JUDGE NG* CT:bms