- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46321 WP No. 24757 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 24757 OF 2023 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN: R H THIPPESWAMY, S/O LATE HALAPPA, AGE 68 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, (SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED), R/O PALAVVANAHALLY VILLAGE, AIMANGALA HOBLI, HIRIYUR TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT 572 143. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. R SHASHIDHARA.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MAJOR WORKS DIVISION, KPTCL, SUB DIVISION-1, JCR BADAVANE 3RD CROSS, (EAST), CHITRADURGA-577 501. 2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MAJOR WORKS DIVISION, KPTCL, SUB DIVISION-1, JCR BADAVANE, 3RD CROSS, (EAST), CHITRADURGA 577501. …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46321 WP No. 24757 of 2023 (BY SRI. ANIRUDH A KULKARNI.,ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE JUDGEMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE 1ST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT CHITRADURGA IN CIVIL MISC NO.81/2022 DTD 22.09.2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-J AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL ORDER The petitioner has called in question the judgment and order dated 22.09.2023 (Annexure-J) passed by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga (for short ‘the trial Court’) in Civil Miscellaneous No.81/2022, whereby the claim petition filed by the petitioner seeking enhancement of compensation in respect of the damages caused due to laying of 66KV high tension electricity transmission line over his agricultural land was dismissed. 2. The brief facts of the case are as under: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46321 WP No. 24757 of 2023 The petitioner is an agriculturalist and owner of agricultural lands in Survey No.8/P1 measuring 6 acres 15 guntas and Survey No.8/P7 measuring 7 guntas situated at Palavvanahally Village, Aimangala Hobli, Hiriyur Taluk, Chitradurga District. The respondents, for the purpose of transmission of electricity, laid 66KV high tension electricity line and erected a tower in the petitioner's land. According to the petitioner, the laying of transmission line resulted in destruction of standing crops, damage to borewell, restriction on use of land beneath the corridor area and diminution in the value of the land. 3. Compensation was assessed and paid by the respondents on basis of an order passed by the Deputy Commissioner. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, the petitioner filed Civil Miscellaneous No.81/2022 seeking enhancement. The trial Court by the impugned order dismissed the said petition holding that the compensation has already been paid as per the Deputy - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46321 WP No. 24757 of 2023 Commissioner's order and that no case for enhancement was made. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that though the respondents assert that the compensation has been paid in terms of the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, no independent or recent assessment of diminution in the value of the land in fact has been made. It is submitted that the order of the Deputy Commissioner does not disclose any methodology, percentage or basis for quantifying the diminution of the land value arising of permanent restrictions imposed on the petitioner's right to use the land beneath the high tension transmission line and corridor. Learned counsel further contends that without a specific determination of loss in market value caused by such restrictions, cannot be equated with assessment of diminution of the land value as required in law. 5. It is submitted that the trial Court has proceeded on an erroneous assumption that diminution of the land - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46321 WP No. 24757 of 2023 value stood assessed without examining whether such assessment was actually carried out by the competent authority. On this ground alone it is contented that the impugned order suffers from non-application of mind and matter requires remand for fresh consideration after properly determining compensation towards diminution of the land value by relying the decision of this Court in the case of the EXECUTIVE ENGINEER AND ANOTHER Vs. DODDAKKA1 (DODDAKKA). 6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents contends that the Deputy Commissioner has in fact assessed and compensated the diminution in the land value, though not under a separate nomenclature. It is submitted that the compensation awarded towards right of way/corridor area itself represents compensation for diminution of land value caused by restriction on use of land beneath the high tension transmission line. It is submitted that the Deputy Commissioner has adopted the 1 WP.No.39979/2013, D.D.06.08.2014 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46321 WP No. 24757 of 2023 Sub Registrar guideline value and applied the permissible percentage of diminution in accordance with the prevailing norms and judicial precedents. Further, that the trial Court upon examining the records, has rightly held that the compensation already paid is just and reasonable and the petitioner failed to place any cogent material to establish that diminution of land value was either assessed or was inadequately assessed and would contend that the writ petition is devoid of merit and does not warrant any interference, much less remand. 7. This Court has carefully considered the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 8. Though the respondents contend that the compensation paid towards the right of way/corridor area constitutes compensation of diminution in land value, the order of the Deputy Commissioner does not disclose a clear, reasoned or a conscious assessment of diminution as a distinct component. The order does not indicate the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46321 WP No. 24757 of 2023 basis methodology or percentage applied to quantify the loss in value attributable to the permanent restrictions imposed on the petitioner's right to use the land beneath the transmission line. 9. The trial Court has proceeded on the assumption that the diminution stood assessed, without examining whether such assessment was actually undertaken in accordance with law and without independently evaluating the evidence produced by the petitioner on the extent of restriction and resultant loss. In the absence of a speaking determination on diminution of land value, the conclusion that the compensation paid is just and reasonable cannot be sustained. The Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of DODDAKKA has held at paragraph Nos.24 and 25 as under: “24. As regards the diminution value of the land falling within the corridor, the learned District Judge having determined the market value of the land has awarded 50% of the same as diminution value. It cannot be disputed that though the farmer - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46321 WP No. 24757 of 2023 is not capable of growing trees underneath the corridor, he is not totally deprived of utilizing the land for carrying out other agricultural operations. He is entitled to grow other crops, which may not affect the high voltage transmission line. Though the farmer is deprived of the opportunity to utilize the land to its full potential and grow horticulture crops, particularly consisting of trees and other luxurious shrubs, he is capable of utilizing the land. The title of the land continues to vest in him. It is, no doubt, true that his access to the land and use of the same by erecting any pole, shed or any other installation will be restricted. In a case like this where high voltage transmission line is drawn across the land, utilization of the other portion of the land is also affected. Therefore, all these factors have to be taken into consideration before determining the diminution in the land value on account of drawing of high voltage electrical line. If these relevant factors are borne in mind, particularly having regard to the photographs produced and the evidence adduced by the claimant – land owner, I find that 30% of the market value of the area affected shall have to be paid as diminution value of the land to the farmer. 25. The market value of the land has been determined at Rs.2,00,000/- per acre based on the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46321 WP No. 24757 of 2023 evidence on record, particularly the certificate issued by the Sub Registrar. There is no scope to interfere with the valuation of the market value made by the learned District Judge. Therefore, the only modification that can be made in awarding the diminution value is that instead of 50% of the market value awarded by the learned District Judge, it has to be calculated at 30%. If so done, the diminution value of the land comes to Rs.42,705/- (Rs.5,000/- per gunta X 28.47 guntas X 30/100 =42,705/).” 10. In light of the decision of this Court in the case of the DODDAKKA, the diminution value has to be assessed, and this omission goes to the root of the matter. Accordingly, the impugned order warrants interference and the matter requires remand for fresh consideration especially to ascertain whether diminution in land value has been assessed and if not to determine and quantify compensation towards diminution of land value after affording due opportunity to both parties. Accordingly, this Court pass the following: - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46321 WP No. 24757 of 2023 ORDER i) The writ petition is allowed. ii) The judgment and order dated 22.09.2023 (Annexure-J) passed by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga (for short ‘the trial Court’) in Civil Miscellaneous No.81/2022 is hereby set aside. iii) The matter is remanded to the trial Court for fresh consideration in accordance with law. iv) The parties are directed to appear before the trial Court on 08.01.2026 without waiting for further notice. v) While considering the matter, the trial Court shall specifically examine that whether the Deputy Commissioner has undertaken a conscious, reasoned and - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46321 WP No. 24757 of 2023 independent assessment of diminution in the value of the land caused due to the laying of high tension transmission line. vi) If such diminution has not been assessed, proceed to determine and quantify compensation towards diminution of land value as a distinct head. Having regard to the extent of restrictions, value of land and relevant evidence placed on record as per the DODDAKKA's case. vii) Re-examine the evidence relating to crops loss, borewell damage and extent of land affected and pass a reasoned and speaking order. viii) All the contentions of the parties are kept open. ix) The trial Court shall not be influenced by any of the observations made herein, which - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46321 WP No. 24757 of 2023 are only limited to the purpose of disposal of the present writ petition. Sd/- _____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA PHM List No.: 3 Sl No.: 1