ORDER :

The revision petitioners are aggrieved by the dismissal of original petitions filed by them seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded for the damages sustained due to the drawing of High Tension Electric Lines over their properties by the first respondent Corporation. The original petitions were dismissed for the reason that they were filed after three years of receipt of compensation and are hence barred by limitation.

2. Adv.Babu Karukapadath appearing for the revision petitioners contended that the reasons stated in the impugned order are factually incorrect and legally unsustainable. It is submitted that during 2010-11 compensation towards the value of trees cut alone was paid and the compensation towards diminution in land value was paid only during 2017-2018. The revision petitioners had approached the District Court in 2019 dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation paid towards diminution in land value within the three year period stipulated in Article 137. Drawing attention to the words 'if any dispute arises concerning the sufficiency of the compensation to be paid under Section 10', it is argued that a dispute regarding sufficiency of compensation can aris