Full Judgment
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 7251 OF 2022 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN: THIMMAPPA, S/O LATE GUNDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/O KODIHALLI VILLAGE, TALAKU HOBLI, CHALLAKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI PRAVEEN KUMAR RAIKOTE, ADVOCATE)
AND: ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BRUHATH KAMAGARI VIBHAGA, KPTCL, 400 K V, CHITRADURGA-577 501. Digitally signed by B …RESPONDENT K MAHENDRAKUMAR (BY SRI M.R VIJAY KUMAR, ADVOCATE) Location: High Court of Karnataka THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE CHITRADURGA IN MISC COMPENSATION TO RS.5,00,000/ACRE WITH 12 PERCENT INTEREST PER ANNUM. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: -2- The petitioner asserts that he is the owner of the land bearing Sy.No.10, measuring 4 acres situated at Mannakote Village, Challakere Taluk, Chitradurga District, and the respondents have drawn the transmission line and installed towers on the subject land.
2. The petitioner not satisfied with the quantum of the compensation awarded by the Deputy Commissioner filed an application under Section 16 (3) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1985, seeking
enhanced compensation. The learned District Judge granted compensation of Rs.8,293/- to the petitioners towards the installation of the tower and drawing of the transmission line (Corridor Area). The petitioner's contention is that the market value of the land has been determined at Rs.35,000/- per acre without any basis, and therefore the impugned order passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge is not sustainable.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent would submit that only
the transmission lines were drawn in the subject land, and towers are not installed as contended by the petitioner. He further submits that the petition filed after an inordinate delay of more than 11 years is not maintainable and the petition deserves to be dismissed solely on this ground.
4. Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.
5. Admittedly, transmission lines were drawn on the
petitioner's land. The petitioner had not produced any evidence for determining the market value of the subject land. The market value has been determined without any basis, and the impugned order passed by -3- the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge is not sustainable in law, since the petitioner is entitled for just and proper compensation towards laying of transmission lines and installation of towers.
6. Although, the impugned order was passed on 09.10.2012
the present petition was filed on 29.03.2022, and no explanation is offered for the delay in filing the writ petition. However, having regard to the fact that the petitioner is entitled for just and proper compensation, the delay in filing the writ petition requires to be condoned. Accordingly, I pass the following:
i) Petition is allowed and remanded. ii) Impugned order dated 09.10.2012 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge Chitradurga in Misc.No.237 of 2011 is hereby quashed, and the matter is remanded to the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge for re-determining the compensation in accordance with law. iii) It is made clear that the petitioner is not entitled for any interest in the event of enhancement of the compensation from 09.10.2012 to 29.03.2022. iv) All contentions are kept open. v) Petitioner is granted liberty to file additional documents, if any.
Sd/- JUDGE PB