V.P.Chandra Bose Vs. Executive Engineer

V.P.Chandra Bose vs Executive Engineer

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Nov 08, 2013

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1097291

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1097291
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice V.Chitambaresh
Decided On: Nov 08, 2013
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

V.P.Chandra Bose

Respondent

Executive Engineer

Excerpt

.....- - - - - - dated this the 8th day of november, 2013 judgment a post carrying electricity supply line with an ab switch board was damaged when it was hit by the car owned and driven by the petitioner. the petitioner has concededly paid a fine of rs.1,000/- pursuant to the order of the court of the magistrate for negligent driving. that fine is the maximum amount that could be imposed for interrupting free supply of electricity under section 25a of the indian telegraph act, 1885.2. the compensation for the loss suffered to the electric post and the switch board has to be separately recovered from the petitioner. the kerala state electricity board for that purpose has to necessarily invoke the provisions of section 166 of the motor vehicles act, 1988. a claim petition would lie before the motor accidents claims tribunal by the owner of the property (the electricity board) to recover the compensation. w.p.(c) no.9801 of2013-2- 3. the petitioner contends that any such compensation awarded by the tribunal would be indemnified by the insurer. there is no justification for the electricity board to unilaterally resort to revenue recovery proceedings for realisation of a sum of rs.37,458/- towards the damages allegedly caused.4. exts.p2 & p3 revenue recovery notices issued by the second respondent at the instance of the first respondent are therefore quashed leaving open the remedy to recover the damages by resort to the motor vehicles act. the writ petition is allowed. no costs. sd/- v. chitambaresh judge shg/

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH FRIDAY,THE8H DAY OF NOVEMBER201317TH KARTHIKA, 1935 WP(C).No. 9801 of 2013 (A) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- V.P.CHANDRA BOSE VALAYAMKANDAM, KUMARAKOM SOUTH P.O, KOTTAYAM686563. BY ADVS.SRI.V.B.PREMACHANDRAN SRI.P.K.VINOD KUMAR SRI.K.N.GOVINDANKUTTY MENON SMT.SMITHA MENON RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ELECTRICAL DIVISION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD PALLOM, KOTTAYAM686007.

2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (R.R) KOTTAYAM686001. R1 BY SRI.JAICE JACOB,SC,KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD SMT.P.K.RADHIKA, SC-KSEB R2 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. ANITHA RAVINDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON0811-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 9801 of 2013 (A) --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE FIR DATED215.12 BEFORE THE IST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT1 KOTTAYAM. EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED911.12 U/S.7 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT. EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED911.12 PRIOR TO ATTACHMENT OF LAND U/S. 34 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT. EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED53.13 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE2D RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- R1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE SITE MAHAZAR R1(b) TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT TO THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE EAST POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM ON110.2012 R1(c) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER

NO.DB5DW-16/2012-13/487 DATED1610.2012 //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE Shg/ V. CHITAMBARESH, J.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.9801 OF2013- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 8th day of November, 2013

JUDGMENT

A post carrying electricity supply line with an AB Switch Board was damaged when it was hit by the car owned and driven by the petitioner. The petitioner has concededly paid a fine of Rs.1,000/- pursuant to the order of the court of the Magistrate for negligent driving. That fine is the maximum amount that could be imposed for interrupting free supply of electricity under Section 25A of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885.

2. The compensation for the loss suffered to the electric post and the switch board has to be separately recovered from the petitioner. The Kerala State Electricity Board for that purpose has to necessarily invoke the provisions of Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. A claim petition would lie before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal by the owner of the property (the Electricity Board) to recover the compensation. W.P.(C) No.9801 OF2013-2- 3. The petitioner contends that any such compensation awarded by the Tribunal would be indemnified by the insurer. There is no justification for the Electricity Board to unilaterally resort to revenue recovery proceedings for realisation of a sum of Rs.37,458/- towards the damages allegedly caused.

4. Exts.P2 & P3 revenue recovery notices issued by the second respondent at the instance of the first respondent are therefore quashed leaving open the remedy to recover the damages by resort to the Motor Vehicles Act. The writ petition is allowed. No Costs. Sd/- V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE Shg/

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2013 Same Parties V.P.Chandra Bose vs Executive Engineer Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice V.Chitambaresh