SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 442399

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
K S HEMALEKHA
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER – Appellant
Versus
PUSHPA – Respondent
WP 14603/2025



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO.14603 OF 2025 (GM-KEB)

BETWEEN:

1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

MAJOR WORKS DIVISION,

KPTCL, SUB-DIVISION-1

JCR CIRCLE, 3RD CROSS (EAST)

JCR EXTENSION,

CHITRADURGA-577501

REPRESENTED BY MALLIKARJUNA SWAMY.

2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,

MAJOR WORKS DIVISION,

KPTCL, SUB-DIVISION-1

JCR CIRCLE, 3RD CROSS (EAST)

JCR EXTENSION,

CHITRADURGA-577501

REPRESENTED BY MANJUNATHA SWAMY. …PETITIONERS

(BY SMT. RAKSHITHA D.J., ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by

MAHALAKSHMI B M AND:

Location: HIGH

COURT OF 1. PUSHPA

KARNATAKA S/O LATE KARADAPPA

AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,

2. KARIYAMMA

W/O LATE KARADAPPA

AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT

KARIOBANAHALLI VILLAGE,

HIRIYUR TALUK,

CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577501. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI R. SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 01.10.2024 IN CIVIL MISC.NO.67/2021 PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A TO THE WRIT PETITION.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’

GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

ORAL ORDER

The petitioners-Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (KPTCL) seek to challenge the order dated 01.10.2024 passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga (hereinafter referred to as the 'District Court' for short) in Civil Misc.No.67/2021 whereby the Court awarded diminution value compensation in favour of the respondents.

2. Respondents (Land owners) filed Civil Misc.

No.67/2021 under Section 16 (3) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (‘Telegraph Act’ for short), claiming additional compensation for alleged loss caused due to the installation of 220 KV transmission line / tower over his land bearing Re.Sy.No.104/5 measuring 1 acres 36 guntas situated at Kariobanahalli Village, Hiriyur Taluk. The ground urged by the respondents in the petition was that the KPTCL erected towers over about 1 acres 20 guntas of his land, destroyed standing crops and trees, reduced the fertility and market value of the land and sought `5,00,000/- with interest for diminishing of the land value.

3. The petitioners (KPTCL) filed objections contending that they have already paid a sum of `1,86,978/- as full and final compensation for the diminution land value as per the Deputy Commissioner's order dated 04.12.2018, and the respondents accepted the compensation without protest, that no crops existed on the land at the time of drawing the line in 2018.

4. The Trial Court partly allowed the miscellaneous petition and awarded additional compensation of `26,829/-

with 8% interest.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners-

KPTCL and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents- claimants.

Petitioners’ contention:

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the full compensation has already been paid towards the diminution in land value as fixed by the Deputy Commissioner for a sum of `1,86,978/-. The compensation has been voluntarily received by the respondents without any objections and the respondents never challenged Ex.R1. Hence, reopening the compensation is impermissible. It is submitted that once the diminution land value was assessed and paid, awarding additional compensation amount towards diminution would amount to duplication. The impugned order has no finding on the Deputy Commissioner's assessment and this amounts to the perversity, which warrants interference by this Court.

Respondents’ contention:

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents contends that the respondents are the owners and cultivator of land bearing Re.Sy.No.104/5 measuring 1 acres 36 guntas, wherein various crops were being grown. The KPTCL destroyed crops over an extent of 1 acre 20 guntas while erecting 220 KV towers, resulting in substantial loss, reduced fertility and de

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top