THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD versus LIVISHA ETC. ETC.

Citation: [2007] 7 S.C.R. 356 · Decided: 18-05-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
THE KERALA STA TE ELECTRICITY BOARD 
v. 
LMSHA ETC. ETC. 
MAY 18,2007 
[S.B. SINHA AND MARKANDEY KA TJU, JJ.] 
Telegraph Act, 1885-ss. JO, 11, 12 and 16-Compensation-For 
cutting of trees for drawal of Electric Line-Determination of-Held : In 
C order to determine the compensation, purpose and object of the statute and 
the methodology laid down therein for the purpose thereof should be the 
guiding/actor-There cannot be a fixed formula/or that and it would depend 
on facts of each case-Electricity Act, 1910-s.5/. 
Trees had been cut and removed for drawal of 110 K. V. Electric Line. 
D _The Board/Land Acquisition Officer determined the amount of compensation. 
Reference Court determined the amount of compensation holding that the 
annuity thereof shall be calculated on the basis of 5°h return. In Revision 
petitions, High Court enhanced the amount of compensation and the rate of 
diminution at 50% from 40%. Hence the present appeals. 
E 
Allowing the appeals and remitting the matter to High Court, the Court. 
HELD: 1. No reason has been assigned in supportoftheviewtaken by 
High Court in enhancing the land value and by enhancing the rate of the 
diminution in land value to 50% from 40%. The materials placed on record 
were not analysed. Why such a view was taken also does not appear from the 
F records of the case. The amount of compensation is required to be determined 
keeping in view the purpose and object of the statute. There cannot be any 
\;. 
raed formula therefor or the other. Although, undoubtedly one formula laid 
down, may assist the Board and/or Reference Court to apply the same but 
there cannot be hard and fast rule in this behalf. The purpose anil object of 
G the Act and the methodology laid down therein for the purpose thereof should 
be the guiding factor. [Para 7) [359-B, C, DJ 
KS.E. Boardv. Marthoma Rubber Co. Ltd., (1981) KLT 646, referred 
to. 
H 
356 
KERAlA STA TE ELECTRICITY BOARD v. LIVISHA ETC. ETC. [S.B. SINHA, J.] 
357 
..... -< 
2. The situs of the land, the distance between the high voltage electricity A 
line laid thereover, the extent of the line thereon as also the fact as to whether 
the high voltage line passes over a small track of land or through the middle 
of the land and other similar relevant factors would be determinative for 
paymeni: of compensation. The value of the land would also be a relevant factor. 
The owner of the land furthermore, in a given situation may lose his B 
substantive right to use the property for the purpose for whk:h the same was 
meant to be used. So far as the compensation in relation to fruit bearing trees 
"'-. 
are concerned the same would also depend upon the facts and circumstances 
of each case. High Coart should consider the matter afresh on the merits of 
each matter having regard to the fact situation obtaining therein. 
[Paras 10, 11 and 13) (361-G-H; 362-A, B, F) c 
Land Acquisition Officer, A.P. v. Kamandana Ramakrishna Rao and Anr. 
(2007) AIR SCW 1145; Kapur Singh Mistry v. Financial Commission and 
Revenue Secretary to Govt. of Punjab and Ors., [1995) Supp. 2 SCC 635; 
State of Haryana v. Gurucharan Singh and Anr., [1995) Supp. 2 SCC 637 
and Airports Authority of India v. Satyagopal Roy and Ors., [2002) 3 SCC D 
527, referred to • 
..._.., 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 289 of 2006. 
From the Final Judgment and Order dated 28.3.2005 of the High Court 
ofKerala at Emakulam, in C.R.P. No. 1279 of20')3. 
E 
WITH 
CA. Nos. 2774, 2773, 2772, 2771 of2007 
,. 
M. T. George for the Appellant. 
F 
-
Baby Augustine, Eby Augustine, M.K. Michael for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
S.B. SINHA, J. 1. Leave granted in SLPs. 
G 
2. These appeals involving common questions of law and fact were 
taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common 
-..., 
judgment. What would be the amount of compensation for the trees cut and 
removed by the Kerala State Electricity Board, a body corporate, constituted 
and incorporated under Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 is the question involved H 
358 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2007] 7 S.C.R. 
A in these appeals. Indisputably, amount of compensation for the said plirpose 
is determined in terms of the provisions of Section I 0, Part III of the Indian 
Telegraph Act, 1885. 
3. Before we embark upon the said question, we may notice the.amount 
of compensation that has been determined by the Appellant-Board as also by 
B the Reference Court being
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.