- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:1004 WP No. 13932 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 13932 OF 2020 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN: SRI. B. SHIVANANDAIAH, AGED 63 YEARS, SON OF LATE BORAIAH, RESIDING AT HARDAGERE VILLAGE, NITUR HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT- 572 126 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. JAGADISH BALIGA N.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER(V), NO.1 KVM, MAJOR WORKS LINE, SUB DIVISION, TUMAKURU SUB DIVISION, TUMAKURU- 572 101. 2. THE CHAIRMAN, KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION COMPANY LIMITED, KAVERI BHAVAN, BENGALURU- 560 009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RAKSHITHA D J.,ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN CIVIL MISC. NO.68/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND MACT AT TUMAKURU AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by KORLAHALLI BHARATHIDEVIKRISHNACHARYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:1004 WP No. 13932 of 2020 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for respondents. 2. This petition is directed against the order dated 13.03.2020, passed by the learned I Addl. District Judge, Tumakuru, in Civil Misc.No.68/2007. In terms of the impugned order, the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 19 of the Electricity Act, 1910 read with Section 16(4)(8) and Section 10(2) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, is allowed in-part. The trial Court awarded compensation of Rs.7,03,800/- along with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation of the entire amount. The trial Court has awarded the compensation under the following heads: 1. The petitioner is entitled for compensation in respect of 5 years old coconut trees. Rs.2,05,800/- 2. The petitioner is entitled for compensation in respect of 3 years old coconut trees. Rs.1,74,000/- - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:1004 WP No. 13932 of 2020 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the trial Court has not taken into consideration the diminishing value of the land in view of high tension wire being laid over the land of the petitioner. It is his contention that if that value had been taken into consideration, the petitioner would be entitled for higher compensation. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents would contend that no evidence is led relating to diminishing of the value of the land despite several opportunities being granted to the petitioner. It is the contention of the respondents that the matter had been remanded on three occasions, initially the petition was dismissed on the ground of limitation, which was called in question by the petitioner and the matter was 3. The petitioner is entitled for compensation in respect of 5 years old mango trees. Rs.25,000/- 4. The petitioner is entitled for compensation in respect of 3 years old mango trees. Rs.2,01,000/- 5. The petitioner is entitled for compensation in respect of 12 years old 14 teak wood trees. Rs.98,000/- TOTAL Rs.7,03,800/- - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:1004 WP No. 13932 of 2020 remanded later and petition was allowed. Being aggrieved by the same, respondents filed writ petition and matter was remanded to consider the case afresh and for the third time, the matter was heard by giving opportunity to both the parties. The petitioner has not led any evidence relating to diminishing value of the land. 5. This Court has considered the contentions raised by both parties. Even before this Court, the petitioner has not produced any materials to show the diminishing value of the land because of laying of high tension wire over the land of the petitioner. 6. Under these circumstances, this Court is of the view that there cannot be any further remand. 7. As far as other contention relating to inadequacy of compensation is concerned, this Court has considered the materials on record and found that the extent of the land which is sought to be rendered uncultivable is 1600 sq.mtrs. There are two panchanamas. One panchanama reveals that there are 173 coconut trees and another panchanama - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:1004 WP No. 13932 of 2020 reveals that there are 98 coconut trees. Considering the extent of land over which the high tension wire is laid, this Court is of the view that it is almost impossible to have 173 coconut trees over the said land. The finding of the trial Court that there existed 98 coconut trees appears sound and reasonable. It is also noticed that the trial Court has deducted 30% towards the cultivation expenses and awarded compensation based on that and the evidence relating to compensation awarded in respect of Mango, Teak and Honge is also based on the evidence placed on record. 8. Under these circumstances, this Court does not find any ground to interfere in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 9. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE BK/CHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37