IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO.5044 OF 2023 (GM-KEB)

BETWEEN:

1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,

MAJOR WORKS, KPTCL, SUB-DIVISION 1,

JCR EXTENSION, 3^RD CROSS (EAST),

CHITRADURGA.

2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,

MAJOR WORKS, KPTCL, SUB-DIVISION 1,

JCR EXTENSION, 3^RD CROSS (EAST),

CHITRADURGA. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI VIKRAM UNNI RAJAGOPAL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

MAHANTHAPPA @ MAHANTHESH .N

@ MAHANTHESHI

S/O LATE NINGAPPA,

Digitally signed by

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,

MAHALAKSHMI B M

RESIDING AT KYADIGERE VILLAGE,

Location: HIGH

COURT OF KYADIGERE POST,

KARNATAKA CHITRADURGA TALUK AND DISTRICT-577524. ...RESPONDENT

(BY SRI R. SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227

OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 17.08.2022 IN CIVIL MISC.NO.277/2019 PASSED BY 2^ND ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA

(ANNEXURE-A) AND DISMISS CIVIL MISC NO.277/2019.

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 17.08.2022 passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga (hereinafter referred to as the 'District Court' for short) in Civil Misc. No.277/2019 whereby the Court awarded diminution value compensation in favour of the respondent.

2. Respondent (Land owner) filed Civil Misc.

No.277/2019 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 Sy. No.536/1P3 measuring 03 acres 26 guntas situated at D.S. Halli, Kasaba Hobli, Chitradurga Taluk. The ground urged by the respondent in the petition was that the KPTCL erected towers over about 1 acre of his land, destroyed standing crops, reduced the fertility and market value of the land and sought `32,00,000/-

with interest for diminishing of the land value.

3. The petitioners (KPTCL) filed objections contending that they have already paid a sum of `1,83,000/- as full and final compensation for the diminution land value as per the Deputy Commissioner's order dated 04.12.2018, and the respondent 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 `1,19,363/- with 8% interest.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners-

KPTCL and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent- claimant.

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 `1,83,000/-. The compensation has been voluntarily received by the respondent without any objections and the respondent 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.

Respondent's contention:

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent contends that the respondent is the owner and cultivator of land bearing Sy. No.536/1P3 measuring 3 acres 26 guntas, wherein various crops were being grown. The KPTCL destroyed crops over an extent of 1 acre while erecting 220 KV towers, resulting in substantial loss, reduced fertility and decrease in the market value of the land. The respondent therefore claimed compensation towards the diminution in value. The Trial Court, after noticing th