- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20727 WP No. 1717 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 1717 OF 2021 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN: 1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE), MAJOR WORKS DIVISION, K.P.T.C.L., KOTHITHOPU ROAD, TUMUKURU TOWN-572 101, TUMUKURU DISTRICT. 2. THE ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE), MAJOR WORKS DIVISION-IV, K.P.T.C.L., KOTHITHOPU ROAD, TUMUKURU TOWN-572 101, TUMUKURU DISTRICT. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. H.V.DEVARAJU., ADVOCATE) AND: DODDAKEMPAIAH S/O SANNAKEMPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/O AASHRIHALL VILLAGE, C.N.HALLI TALUK-572 214. TUMUKURU DISTRICT. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.SANTHOSH.M.H., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. PATEL.D.KAREGOWDA., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20727 WP No. 1717 of 2021 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.H.V.Devaraju., counsel for the petitioners and Sri.Santosh.M.H., counsel on behalf of Sri.Patel D.Karegowda., for the respondent have appeared 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 petitioner filed a petition in Civil Misc. No.10021/2016 before the V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiptur, and sought for enhanced compensation. It is stated that the petitioner is the owner of the land bearing Sy.No.59/4 situated at Aashrihall Village, Kandikere Hobli, C.N.Halli Taluk, Tumakuru District. The respondents have drawn 110 KV Electricity Transmission line from Thimmanahalli to Katrikehal tapping point, which passes through petitioner's - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20727 WP No. 1717 of 2021 garden land. They have cut and removed fruit bearing trees and destroyed crops. 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 his land there is diminution of value of the land and hence, he 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 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. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20727 WP No. 1717 of 2021 The petitioner got examined as PW1 and produced eight documents which were marked as Exs.P.1 to P8. One Sri.Hanumantharayappa 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 18.10.2019 awarded enhanced compensation of Rs.2,05,868/- with interest 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.H.V.Devaraju., 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:20727 WP No. 1717 of 2021 Counsel submitted that Trial Judge has 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, he submitted that award of compensation requires modification and therefore, submitted that the Writ Petition may be allowed. Counsel for the respondent justified the Judgment of the Trial Court and submits that the Writ Petition may be dismissed. 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:20727 WP No. 1717 of 2021 7. Counsel Sri.H.V.Devaraju., 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. I have carefully perused the order passed by the Trial Court. The award amount in respect of Coconut, Jali and Honge 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 23 = Rs.2,01,250/- (for 23 Coconut Trees). SL.NO. NO. OF TREES YIELD PRICE (Rs.) 1. 23 125 10/- - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20727 WP No. 1717 of 2021 CALCULATION OF JALI TREES: There are six Jali Trees. The Trial Court has awarded Rs.4,000/- per tree. The same has to be modified as Rs.2,000/- per tree. Rs.2,000 X 6 = Rs.8,000/-. CALCULATION OF HONGE TREES: There are three Honge Trees. The Trial Court has awarded Rs.3,000/- per tree. The same has to be modified as Rs.2,000/- per tree. Rs.2,000 X 3 = Rs.6,000/-. The compensation awarded towards Arecanut and Nem Trees remain unaltered. Hence, the re-assessed compensation is as under: 1. 23 Coconut Trees Rs.2,01,250/- 2. 63 Arecanut Trees Rs.31,500/- 3. 04 Neem Trees Rs.16,000/- 4. 06 Jali Trees Rs.12,000/- 5. 03 Honge Trees Rs.6,000/- TOTAL Rs.2,66,750/- - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20727 WP No. 1717 of 2021 8. Taking into consideration the above calculation, the claimants are entitled for total compensation of Rs.2,66,750/-. Counsel Sri.H.V.Devaraju., submits that the Authority has already paid a sum of Rs.1,62,132/- while drawing up of the line. Therefore, an amount of Rs.1,04,618/- is to be paid to the claimant 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 18.10.2019 passed by the Court of V Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Tiptur in Civil Misc.No.10021/2016 is modified. The claimant is entitled for balance compensation of Rs.1,06,618/- 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.H.V.Devaraju., submits that pursuant to the interim order, 60% of the award amount has - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20727 WP No. 1717 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 Claimant. If there is any excess amount, the same shall be refunded to the Authorities. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 49.2