- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33897 WP No. 2209 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 2209 OF 2024 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN: PARAMESHAWARAPPA @ BAPURADA PARAMESHWARAPPA S/O BAPURADA HANUMANTHAPPA @ HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, R/O HALE DADAGURU VILLAGE, DADAGURU POST, MOLAKALMURU TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MAJOR WORKS DIVISION,KPTCL SUB-DIVISION-1, JCR BADAVANE, 3RD CROSS (EAST) CHITRADURGA - 577 001. 2. THE ASST EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MAJOR WORKS DIVISION, KPTCL SUB-DIVISION-1, JCR BADAVENE, 3RD CROSS (EAST) CHITRADURGA - 577 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SHIRISH KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R2) Digitally signed by GEETHAKUMARI PARLATTAYA S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33897 WP No. 2209 of 2024 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT, MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE 1ST ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT CHITRADURGA IN CIVIL MIS. NO.5/2019 HERE WITH ANNEXURE-A AND B DATED 22.11.2019 BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION WHICH IS JUST AND REASONABLE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B-GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL ORDER Challenging judgment and award dated 22.11.2019 passed by learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, in C.Misc.no.5/2019 as per Annexures-A and B, this writ petition is filed. 2. Sri Spoorthy Hegde Nagaraj, learned counsel for petitioner submitted, petitioner was owner of land measuring 01 Acres 23 guntas, in Sy.no.41/P2 of Dadagur village, Devasamudra Hobli, Molakalmur Taluk, Chitradurga District, which was situated about 100 meters away from National - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33897 WP No. 2209 of 2024 Highway, wherein petitioner was growing groundnuts, etc. On said land, respondents proposed to draw 400 KV Transmission line. Said line occupied an extent of 30.92 guntas, while drawing said line, not only petitioner's crops sustained damages but also petitioner's land diminished in value. Seeking for compensation under Section 16(3) of Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 ('Act' for short), petitioner filed petition in C.Misc.no5/2019 as per Annexures-A and B. 3. On appearance, respondent-authorities opposed petitioner's claim. 4. Based on pleadings, learned District Judge framed following points for consideration: "1) Whether petitioner is entitled for damages/compensation under the head decrease of the value of the land in view of the installation of power line? 2) If petitioner is entitled for compensation, what is the quantum of compensation? 3) What order?" 5. In trial, petitioner examined herself as PW.1 and got marked copies GPA, Record of Rights (RoR) and Sub- Registrar's Guidance Value (SRGV) for year 2018-19 as Exhibits - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33897 WP No. 2209 of 2024 P1 to P3. Respondents did not lead oral evidence but got marked memo of calculation as Exhibit R1 with consent. 6. On consideration, learned District Judge answered point no.1 in affirmative, points no.2 and 3 by holding petitioner entitled to compensation of Rs.23,190/- with interest at 6% per annum. 7. Dissatisfied with quantum of compensation, petitioner has filed this writ petition. 8. It was firstly submitted, while determining compensation, learned District Judge has lost sight of fact that petitioner's land was situated nearer to National Highway and also in Dadagur village. It was submitted, learned District Judge failed to assess compensation based on actual market value and erred in considering SRGV. It was further submitted, assessment of damages at 30% of SRGV instead of 100% of actual market value was erroneous. On said ground, sought for allowing writ petition. 9. Learned counsel for respondents opposed writ petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33897 WP No. 2209 of 2024 10. Heard learned counsel and perused writ petition. 11. From above, it is seen, this writ petition is filed challenging order passed by learned District Judge under Section 16(3) of Act awarding inadequate compensation. Challenge in on specific grounds. 12. Insofar as contention about failure by learned District Judge to award compensation by taking into account actual market value of land instead of SRGV, it is seen, except producing SRGV, no other material was placed on record to determine actual market value of land. Besides this Court in W.P.no.6309/2022 rejected contention for determination of compensation as per provisions of Land Acquisition Enactments. Same would hold good for present writ petition also. 13. Insofar as next contention that petitioner's land was abutting National Highway entitling for higher compensation, it is seen that while passing impugned award, learned District Judge referred to specific admission by PW.1 in cross-examination about failure to produce any documents to - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33897 WP No. 2209 of 2024 show that his land was situated near to National Highway. Likewise, even in SRGV for year 2017-18 of Dadagur village produced, Sy.no.41/P2 does not figure in lands abutting village. Therefore, petitioner's contention would not hold good. 14. It is seen, to substantiate market value, petitioner relied upon SRGV and while assessing compensation, learned District Judge has considered SRGV as basis and awarded 30% of same as compensation. 15. Division Bench of this Court in Assistant Executive Engineer (ELE), Chitradurga v. Sri Doddathimmappa & Ors. (W.A.no.1375/2024 disposed of on 21.07.2025) has held diminution of value of land due to drawing of overhead transmission lines has to be considered at 30%. Therefore, Writ petition is devoid of merits and is dismissed. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE Psg* List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26