- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5728 WP No. 28733 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 28733 OF 2017 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN: THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL), MAJOR WORKS DIVISION, THE KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LTD., KAVOOR, MANGALURU. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. PADMA S UTTUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. VASUDEVA ADIGA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, S/O LATE H. SRINIVAS ADIGA, 2. SRI.GANESH ADIGA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, S/O LATE H. SRINIVAS ADIGA, 3. SRI. DINESH ADIGA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, S/O LATE H. SRINIVAS ADIGA, 4. SMT. LATA G. ROA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, D/O LATE H. SRINIVAS ADIGA, 5. SMT. GEETHA R/ THUNGA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, D/O LATE H. SRINIVAS ADIGA, Digitally signed by PRAMILA G V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5728 WP No. 28733 of 2017 6. SRI. GIRISH ADIGA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, S/O LATE H. SRINIVAS ADIGA, ALL ARE RESIDING AT HEROOR VILLAGE, UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT - 576 101. RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. ASHA SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R6) THIS WP IS FILED PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER AND AWARD DATED 20.04.2017 IN MISC. PETITION NO.2/2011 BEFORE THE PRL. DISTRICT JUDGE, UDUPI VIDE ANEX-G. GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE OPERATION AND EXECUTION OF THE ORDER AND AWARD DATED 20.04.2017 AND FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN MISC. 2/2011 ON THE FILE OF PRL. DISTRICT JUDGE, UDUPI. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE ORAL ORDER Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner/Corporation is assailing the order dated 20.04.2017 in Misc.Case.No.2/2011, on the file of the Principal District Judge, Udupi. In terms of the said order, the claim petition filed by the respondents herein under Section 16(3) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1855, is - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:5728 WP No. 28733 of 2017 allowed-in-part. The learned District Judge has awarded Rs.15,00,000/- as compensation payable by the petitioner-Corporation to the respondents. The impugned order also directs interest at the rate of 6% per annum from 09.03.2009 till payment. 3. Certain facts are admitted. The respondents are the owners of the properties bearing Survey No.46/10P1 measuring 62 cents, Survey No.46/11 measuring 11 cents, Survey No.46/1 measuring 38 cents and Survey No.46/17 measuring 35 cents in all measuring 146 cents in Heroor Village, Udupi Taluk. The petitioner/Corporation has laid high-tension wire over the land of the respondents. This fact is not in dispute. After having laid the high-tension wire, the petitioner-Corporation has paid a compensation of Rs.31,168/-. The said compensation of Rs.31,168/- was paid towards removal of twenty plants beneath the high- tension wire, laid over the land of the respondents. 4. Aggrieved by the said compensation awarded by the petitioner-Corporation, the respondents have filed - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5728 WP No. 28733 of 2017 the petition before the learned District Judge. On appreciation of the evidence, the learned District Judge passed an order, awarding a global compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner-Corporation is before this Court. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner- Corporation would contend that Rs.15,00,000/- awarded by the learned District Judge is on the higher side and is without any basis and to arrive at a figure of Rs.15,00,000/- valid reasons are not assigned by the learned District Judge. It is also further contended that the guidance value of the property was Rs.3,900/-. However, the learned District Judge has wrongly taken Rs.5,600/- as the guidance value and again has committed an error in taking a higher value than the guidance value on the premise that the petition has been filed in the year 2011, though the high-tension wire was laid in 2008. Thus, contends that the order has to be set-aside. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:5728 WP No. 28733 of 2017 6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents would contend that the guidance value fixed before the sub-registrar is not the actual market value. The compensation has to be paid based on the actual market value with the high-tension wire being laid over the properties of the respondent, the properties have become entirely useless and it is virtually a complete acquisition of the land, though the properties technically stand in the name of the respondents. The respondents cannot use the land and the land is permanently lost for all practical purposes, as such, the compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- is justified, is the submission. 7. This Court has considered the contentions raised at the bar and perused the records. 8. It is noticed that the learned District Judge has taken into account of Rs.5,600/- per cent as the guidance value of Poonja land in Heroor Village for the year 2008. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also produced the certificate dated 22.05.2017 issued by the Sub-registrar, - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:5728 WP No. 28733 of 2017 Brahmavar, wherein it is stated that the guidance value of the dry land is Rs.5,600/- per cent for the year 2008 to 2010. In this regard, this Court is of the view that the guidance value for the year 2008 for dry land is to be taken as Rs.5,600/- per cent. However, what is noticed is learned District Judge appears to have taken a higher value on the premise that the petition is filed in the year 2011. The valuation as on the date of laying the high- tension wire would be criteria; determine compensation, not the date of filing the petition. At the same time, this Court has to observe that the market value may be higher than the guidance value or may be less than the guidance value. This is the matter that needs to be adjudicated after analyzing the evidence. Under these circumstances, the matter has to be remitted to the Trial Court for fresh adjudication. The impugned award is set aside. 9. The matter is remitted to the Trial Court for fresh adjudication. The parties are at liberty to lead evidence on the market value of the land as on 2008, and - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:5728 WP No. 28733 of 2017 based on the said market value, the Trial Court shall assess the compensation and pass an appropriate order. 10. It is also noticed that the law laid down by this Court in the case of The Executive Engineer, Chitradurga, KPTCL, and Another v. Doddakka1, the owner of the land is entitled to 30% of the market value as the compensation. Applying the said principle compensation payable to the respondents cannot be less than Rs.2,00,000/-. Hence, petitioner shall remit Rs.2,00,000/- to the respondents and the balance amount if any, to be paid as per the order passed by the learned District Judge. Rs.31,000/- is paid has to be adjusted to Rs.2,00,000/- which is ordered to be paid by this Court. 11. It is also made clear that if in case compensation to be determined by the Trial Court is less than Rs.2,00,000/-, respondents shall refund the balance amount. 1 ILR 2015 KAR 677 - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:5728 WP No. 28733 of 2017 12. Hence, the following: ORDER (i) Writ Petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 20.04.2017 in Misc. Case No.2/2011 passed by the Principal District Judge, Udupi is set aside. (iii) The Trial Court shall consider the petition afresh in accordance with law in the light of observations made above. (iv) Parties shall appear before the Trial Court on 10.03.2025, without any notice of the Trial Court. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE BKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27 - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:5728 WP No. 28733 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU [THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL) VS. SRI VASUDEVA ADIGA AND OTHERS] 28.02.2025 (VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING) CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE ORAL ORDER ON BEING SPOKEN TO This Court vide order dated 07.02.2025 has allowed the petition in part and remanded the matter to the Trial Court for fresh consideration. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo for being spoken to incorporate the details relating to deposit of Rs.11,00,000/- made before the Trial Court in terms of the impugned order. This Court has noticed that in the order then is no direction to release balance amount after release of Rs.2 lakh to the respondent of this petition is made to the amount deposited before the Trial Court. It is noticed that, Rs.11,05,203/- is the amount deposited before the Trial Court. This Court in terms of the order dated 07.02.2025 has directed to release the - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:5728 WP No. 28733 of 2017 amount of Rs.2,00,000/- subject to the judgment to be delivered by the District Court. Under these circumstances, the amount in excess of Rs.2,00,000/- shall be released in favour of the present petitioner. It is also noticed from the order that Rs.31,000/- is already paid by the petitioner to the respondent. Rs.31,000/- which is paid pursuant to the order shall remain with the respondent and same shall be subject to the final outcome of the petition pending before the Trial Court. The balance amount of Rs.9,05,203/- shall be released in favour of the petitioner. This order shall be read along with the order dated 07.02.2025. Sd/- ( ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE KBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1