← Library
High Court of KeralaRP/392/2015disposed of

Kerala State Electricity Board v. Varghese Yohannan

2015-06-05Honourable Mr.Justice P.Bhavadasan3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/15TH JYAISHTA, 1937 RP.No. 392 of 2015 () --------------------------- CRP 452/2014 of THIS HONOURABLE COURT --------------- REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS :

--------------------------------------------------------

1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDHUTHIBHAVAN, PATTOM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TRANSMISSION DIVISION, CHALAKUDY, PIN-680 307.

3. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER TRANSMISSION DIVISION, CHALAKUDY, PIN-680307. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON,SC,KSEB RESPONDENT/PETITIONER :

--------------------------------------- VARGHESE YOHANNAN S/O.YOHANNAN, THELAPPILLY HOUSE, MANJPRA, ANAPPARA P.O., ALUVA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY SRI.M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

bp

P.BHAVADASAN, J.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.P. No. 392 of 2015 in C.R.P.No. 452 of 2014 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 05th day of June, 2015

O R D E R

The review is directed against that portion of the order passed by this Court whereby this Court calculated value per cent at 22,400/- whereas the lower court has adopted the ₹ value as 45,000/- per Are. Strictly speaking, the value per ₹ cent will be only about 18,215/-. There is some error in that ₹ regard. But considering the fact that the line has been drawn in 1985 and the trees were cut and removed there from and considering the fall in value of money, this error need not result in modification of the enhanced compensation passed by this Court. After calculation, the difference comes to only about a little over 12,000/-. That ₹ is compensated by the long passage of time in paying the amount.

R.P. No. 392 of 2015 in C.R.P.No. 452 of 2014 -2For the above reasons, even though the learned standing counsel for the Board may be justified in his submission, considering various aspects, it is felt that no order of rectification is necessary.

This petition is disposed of.

Sd/- P.BHAVADASAN JUDGE ds //True copy// P.A. to Judge