- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21141 WP No. 11686 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 11686 OF 2021 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN: 1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE), MAJOR WORK DIVISION, KPTCL, KOTHITHOPU ROAD, TUMAKURU TOWN, TUMAKURU DISTRICT. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE), MAJOR WORKS DIVISION-IV, K.P.T.C.L., KOTHITHOPU ROAD, TUMAKURU TOWN, TUMAKURU DISTRICT. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. ASWATHAPPA.D., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SIDDAGANGAMMA W/O NITTURAIAH, SINCE DEAD R2 TO 5 ARE TREATED AS LR'S WHO ARE ALREADY ON RECORD. 2. JAYALAKSHMI D/O NITTURAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O HATNA VILLAGE, KIBBANAHALLI HOBLI, TIPTUR TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 201. 3. RADHAMMA W/O RAMAIAH, Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21141 WP No. 11686 of 2021 D/O NITTURAIAH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O ECHANUR VILLAGE, TIPTUR TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 201. 4. RAMESH S/O NITTURAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O HATNA VILLAGE, KIBBANAHALLI HOBLI, TIPTUR TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 201. 5. SHEKARAIAH S/O NITTURAIAH, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/O HATNA VILLAGE, KIBBANAHALLI HOBLI, TIPTUR TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 201. …RESPONDENTS (R2 TO 5-SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED; V/O DATED:30.01.2025 R2 TO 5 ARE TREATED AS LR'S OF DECEASED R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.Aswathappa.D., counsel for the petitioners has appeared through video conferencing. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21141 WP No. 11686 of 2021 An emergent notice to the respondents was ordered on 02.07.2021. A perusal of the office note depicts that the respondents are served and unrepresented. They have neither engaged the services of an advocate nor conducted the case as a party in person. 2. For the sake of convenience, the status of parties is referred to as per their rankings before the Trial Court. 3. The petitioners filed a petition in Civil Misc. No.10017/2015 before the V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiptur, and sought for enhanced compensation. It is stated that the petitioners are the owners of the land bearing Sy.No.164/2 measuring 38 Guntas, Sy.No.164/4 measuring 34 guntas and Sy.No.164/3C measuring 19 Guntas situated at Hatna Village, Kibbanahalli Hobli, Tiptur Taluk, Tumakuru District. The respondents have drawn 220/110 KV Electricity Transmission line from Nonavinakere to Gungarumale tapping point, which passes through petitioners garden land. They have cut and removed fruit bearing trees and destroyed crops. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21141 WP No. 11686 of 2021 It is stated that the compensation awarded is very meager and the Authority has not adopted capitalization method and adopted an unscientific method and the compensation paid is not in accordance with the market rate of the relevant year. It is also stated that since there is a drawing up of high- tension wire over their land there is diminution of value of the land and hence, they prayed for enhancement of compensation with interest. After the issuance of the notice, the KPTCL filed statement of objections. They admitted that they have drawn 220/110 KV Electricity Transmission Line which passes through petitioner’s land and that notice was issued to remove trees and crops. The compensation awarded by the Authority is based on the report of the Senior Assistant Director of Horticulture. Hence, the compensation paid is just and proper accordingly, they prayed for the dismissal of the petition. The first petitioner and fifth petitioner examined themselves PW1 and 2 and produced nine documents which were marked as Exs.P.1 to P9. One Sri.Hanumantharayappa - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21141 WP No. 11686 of 2021 was examined as RW1 and no documents were produced on behalf of respondents. On the trial of the action, the Trial Court vide Judgment dated 23.07.2019 awarded enhanced compensation of Rs.2,73,104/- with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of filing of petition, till the date of recovery. It is this order that is called into question in this Writ Petition on several grounds as set out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition. 4. Sri.Aswathappa.D., counsel for the petitioners submits that the Trial Court has erred in not appreciating the fact that the KPTCL has paid the compensation based on the report of the Senior Assistant Director of Horticulture Department. He has assessed the compensation to be paid on the formula and guidance issued by the Government of Karnataka from time to time. The compensation paid was just and proper. Hence, interfering with the same by further enhancing the compensation has resulted in causing great prejudice to the interest and right of the Authority. Counsel submitted that Trial Judge has erred in not taking into consideration the vital and key facts that the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21141 WP No. 11686 of 2021 Authority has already paid the compensation and the petitioners have received the same without any protest nor have they filed any objections before the Horticulture Department regarding assessment of valuation of the trees. Hence, a grave error has committed by enhancing the compensation and the award of 8% interest is totally unsustainable in law. Accordingly, he submitted that award of compensation requires modification and therefore, submitted that the Writ Petition may be allowed. 5. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. 6. The short question that arises for consideration is whether the compensation awarded by the Trial Court requires modification? 7. Counsel Sri.Aswathappa., in presenting his arguments drew the attention of the Court to the decision in THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KPTCL, CHITRADURGA AND ANOTHER V. DODDAKKA - ILR 2015 KAR 677. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21141 WP No. 11686 of 2021 I have carefully perused the order passed by the Trial Court. The award amount in respect of Coconut Trees requires modification. If we deduct 30% of cost of cultivation in view of DODDAKKA's case, the calculation towards Coconut Trees will be as under: CALCULATION OF COCONUT TREES: • 125 X 10 X 10 = 12,500/- • 30% Cost of Cultivation = 12,500 X 30/100= 3,750/- • 12,500 - 3,750 = Rs.8,750/- per tree • 8,750 X 44 = Rs.3,85,000/- (for 44 Coconut Trees). The compensation awarded towards Teak Trees remain unaltered. Hence, the re-assessed compensation is as under: 1. 44 Coconut Trees Rs.3,85,000/- 2. 10 Teak Trees Rs.20,000/- 3. 04 Teak Trees Rs.80,000/- TOTAL Rs.4,85,000/- SL.NO. NO. OF TREES YIELD PRICE (Rs.) 1. 44 125 10/- - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21141 WP No. 11686 of 2021 8. Taking into consideration the above calculation, the claimants are entitled for total compensation of Rs.4,85,000/-. Counsel Sri.Aswathappa.D., submits that the Authority has already paid a sum of Rs.3,76,896/- while drawing up of the line. Therefore, an amount of Rs.1,08,104/- is to be paid to the claimants with interest at the rate of 6% from the date petition till realization. 9. In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed in part. The Order dated 23.07.2019 passed by the Court of V Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Tiptur in Civil Misc.No. 10017/2015 is modified. The claimant is entitled for balance compensation of Rs.1,08,104/- with interest at the rate of 6% from the date petition till realization. It is needless to observe that the KPTCL Authority shall deposit the balance amount within six weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. 10. Lastly, counsel Sri.Aswathappa.D., submits that pursuant to the interim order, 50% of the award amount has - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21141 WP No. 11686 of 2021 already been deposited before the Trial Court. Hence, an appropriate order may be passed. Submission is noted. The Trial Court is directed to look into the deposit made by the Authority and calculate the same and pay the balance amount to the Claimants. If there is any excess amount, the same shall be refunded to the Authorities. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 55