- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20099 WP No. 10426 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 10426 OF 2020 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN: 1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL), MAJOR WORKS DIVISION, K.P.T.C.L., KOTHITHOPU ROAD, TUMAKURU TOWN, TUMAKUR DISTRICT-572 101. 2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL), MAJOR WORKS DIVISION-IV, K.P.T.C.L., KOTHITHOPU ROAD, TUMAKURU TOWN, TUMAKUR DISTRICT-572 101. …PETITIONERS (BY SMT. DEEPIKA., ADVOCATE FOR SMT. RAKSHITHA.D.J., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M.B.SHIVANNA S/O BASAVEGOWDA, R/O MALAGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE, SHETTIKERE HOBLI, C.N.HALLI TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 214. SINCE DEAD BY LR'S, 1(A) SMT. B.G.VIJAYAKUMARI, W/O LATE MUNISWAMY, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT NO. 750, 2ND CROSS, PUMP HOUSE ROAD, GOVINDAPURA, TIPTUR TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 201. …RESPONDENTS (R1(A)-SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20099 WP No. 10426 of 2020 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 Smt.Deepika., counsel on behalf of Smt.Rakshitha.D.J., for the petitioners has appeared in person. A perusal of the daily order sheet depicts that notice to respondent No.1(A) was ordered on 04.11.2022. A perusal of the office note depicts that respondent No.1(A) is served and unrepresented. She has neither engaged the services of a counsel nor conducted the case as a party in person. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Trial Court. 3. The petitioner filed a petition in Civil Misc. No.10013/2016 before the V Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Tiptur and sought for enhanced compensation. It is stated that the petitioner is the owner of the land bearing Survey Nos.87/4, 78/1P-P2, 88/1 and 78/1P-P2 situated at Malagondnahalli Village, Shettikere Hobli, C.N.Halli - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20099 WP No. 10426 of 2020 Taluk, Tumakuru District. The KPTCL - respondents have drawn 220/110 KV Electricity Transmission Line from K.B.Cross to Thimmanahalli tapping point, which passes through petitioner’s garden land. They have cut and removed fruit bearing trees and destroyed crops. It is stated that the compensation paid 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 Electric Transmission Line over the land, there is diminution of value of the land and hence, he prayed for enhancement of compensation. After the issuance of the notice, the KPTCL filed statement of objections. They admitted that they have drawn 220/11 K.V Electric Transmission Line through the petitioner’s land. 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. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20099 WP No. 10426 of 2020 The petitioner got examined as PW1 and produced eleven documents which were marked as Exs.P.1 to P11. The respondents neither adduced oral evidence nor furnished documentary evidence. On the trial of the action, the Trial Court vide Judgment dated 30.10.2019 enhanced the compensation to Rs.7,63,337/- (Rupees Seven Lakh Sixty Three Thousand Three Hundred and Thirty Seven only) with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of petition till the date of recovery. It is this Judgment that is called into question in this Writ Petition on several grounds as set-out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition. 4. Smt.Deepika., counsel for the petitioner 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. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20099 WP No. 10426 of 2020 Next, she submitted that the aspect regarding cost of cultivation has not been properly considered by the Trial Court. It is further submitted that this Court in various Judgments held that the cost of cultivation should be calculated at 30%. Hence, the same needs interference. Lastly, she submitted that learned Trial Judge erred in not taking into consideration the vital and key facts that the Authority has already paid the compensation and the petitioner has received the same without any protest nor has he 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, she 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? - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20099 WP No. 10426 of 2020 7. Counsel Smt.Deepika., in presenting her arguments drew the attention of the Court to the decision in THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KPTCL, CHITRADURGA AND ANOTHER V. DODDAKKA - ILR 2015 KAR 677. I have carefully perused the order passed by the Trial Court. The award amount in respect of Coconut Trees and Jali Trees require 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 27 = Rs.2,36,250/- (for 27 Coconut Trees). CALCULATION OF JALI TREES: The compensation of Rs.1,000/- awarded towards 2 Jali Trees aged 2 years remain unaltered. SL.NO. NO. OF TREES YIELD PRICE (Rs.) 1. 27 125 10/- - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20099 WP No. 10426 of 2020 The Trial court has awarded Rs.4,000/- each for 8 Jali Trees aged 11 years. The same has to modified as Rs.2,000/- per tree. There are 8 Jali Trees aged 11 years. Rs.2,000 X 08 = Rs.16,000/-. Rs.16,000/- + Rs.1,000/- = Rs.17,000/- (for 10 Jali Trees). The compensation awarded towards Neem Trees, Rosewood Trees and Teak Trees remain unaltered. Hence, the re-assessed compensation is as under: 1. 27 Coconut Trees Rs.2,36,250/- 2. 09 Neem Trees Rs. 40,500/- 3. 10 Jali Trees Rs. 17,000/- 4. 12 Rosewood Trees Rs.2,16,000/- 5. 22 Teak wood Trees Rs.3,08,000/- TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs.8,17,750/- Taking into consideration the above calculation, the claimant is entitled for total compensation of Rs.8,17,750/- (Rupees Eight Lakh Seventeen Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty only). - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20099 WP No. 10426 of 2020 Counsel Smt.Deepika., submits that the Authority has already paid a sum of Rs.1,71,663/- (Rupees One Lakh Seventy One Thousand Six Hundred and Sixty Three only) while drawing up of the line. Therefore, an amount of Rs.6,46,087/- (Rupees Six Lakh Forty Six Thousand and Eighty Seven only) is to be paid to the claimant with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date petition till realization. 8. In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed. The Judgment dated 30.10.2019 passed by the Court of V Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Tiptur in Civil Misc.No.10013/2016 is modified. The claimant is entitled for balance compensation of Rs.6,46,087/- (Rupees Six Lakh Forty Six Thousand and Eighty Seven only) with interest at the rate of 6% per annum 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 receipt of the certified copy of this order. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51