Heemanshu Traders vs IM Bhavsar or his Successor in Officer and Others

C.K. Buch, J.—Heard Shri B.R. Parikh, learned Counsel appearing for the applicant.

Indisputably, the main petition was listed for final hearing on 05th March 2008, but as the Court was not able to take up the petition for hearing, the request to grant interim relief was extended on behalf of the applicant was considered. On that day, the Court passed a detailed speaking order. It would be appropriate for this Court at this stage to reproduce the relevant paragraph Nos. 3, 4 and 6 of the said order, which are as under:

At present the factory premises of the petitioner is without electricity supply. So by way of an interim arrangement, the respondent-Company is hereby directed to restore the electricity supply to the electricity connections at the petitioner''s factory premises in question, subject to making payment of Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand only) at this stage by the petitioner with the Registry of this Court within a period of two weeks from today.

The respondent-Company shall restore the electricity supply at the petitioner''s premises in question within 72 (seventy-two) hours on petitioner''s payment of reconnection charges as well as production of the copy of the receipt of the aforesaid payment made by the petitioner with the Registry of this Court. The petitioner is directed to pay the charges levied by the respondent-Company for reconnection, over and above the amount deposited by the petitioner with the Registry of this Court.

xxx xxx 6. The aforesaid amount paid by the petitioner shall remain with the Registry at this stage and the said payment is subject to the rights and contentions of both the parties.

So, in the interest of justice, now the matter is adjourned to 08th April 2008.

The present application is moved by the applicant expressing grievance that the opponent-company has asked the applicant to pay the amount of Rs. 80,101/- as installation charges. According to Shri B.R. Parikh, learned Counsel appearing for the applicant, this demand has been raised only with a view to see that the electricity energy does not reach to the industrial unit in question of the applicant. It is contended that it is a case of re-connection and not of granting a fresh connection.

Earlier when this matter was listed, the Court was intimated by the Shri Arun D. Oza, learned Counsel appearing for the opponents, that the expenses demanded are the net expenses and the opponent-Company shall have to install a transformer as it was removed on PDC and the applicant is bound to pay the aforesaid amount to get the electricity supply. It would be as good as granting a fresh connection and the applicant shall also have to enter into a fresh agreement as well as fill in Form A-1 with the opponent-Company, if need so arises.

The Court is of the view that technically if a fresh agreement is must as per the practice followed by the opponent-Company, such formality can be completed with a clarification that ultimately the case is not of granting a fresh connection but of restoring the electricity supply on account of intervention of the Court and pendency of the dispute brought before this Court by the applicant.

According to Shri B.R. Parikh, learned Counsel appearing for the applicant, as per the intimation given by the opponent-Company received by the applicant bearing No. 6054 dated 20th December 1995, the applicant had paid the amount of Rs. 55,305-25 ps. and the said amount was accepted by the opponent-Company vide receipt bearing No. L026608 under various heads; the amount of Rs. 32211-50 ps. has been charged for High Tension Tapping; the amount of Rs. 10,493-75 ps. has been charged for Low Tension Connection. Here nothing is required to be paid for Low Tension charges, but the demand of Rs. 71,176/- does not appear to be a genuine demand. If the things have become costlier during the period between the years 1995 and 2008, only the amount of difference would have been demanded at the most and that too without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the applicant. When the amount of Rs. 55,305-25 ps. was paid initially by the applicant, duplication of payment cannot be said to be made by way of interim arrangement. So the applicant if is directed to pay the amount of Rs. 25,000/-, deducting the original amount paid, it would meet the ends of justice at this stage.

Today Shri Arun D. Oza, learned Counsel appearing for the opponents, is absent when called out, however, the Court is inclined to pass this order in absentia. Ultimately, more relevant is that the payment is made keeping the present petition pending and the parties would abide by the outcome of the present petition. When the applicant has already made the payment of Rs. 1.53 lakhs in compliance of the order passed by this Court, the applicant should get power supply at the earliest. The applicant who has already paid the amount of Rs. 1.53 lakhs in compliance of the order passed by this Court if is asked to pay the amount of Rs. 80,000/- for re-establishment of electricity energy at the doorstep would be nothing but frustration. Hence, the present application is required to be allowed.

In view of aforesaid, the present application is hereby allowed. The opponents are hereby directed to re-establish the electricity energy of the industrial unit of the applicant in question, subject to making payment of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) by the applicant. Shri B.R. Parikh, learned Counsel appearing for the applicant, states that the applicant shall pay the amount of Rs. 25,000/- with the opponent-Company without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties. On receipt of the said amount of Rs. 25,000/-, the earlier order passed by this Court dated 05th May 2008 shall be complied with i.e. by re-establishing the electricity supply at the earliest, preferably within a period of one week from the date of payment. Notice is discharged. Direct Service is permitted.

FURTHER ORDER

Before the aforesaid order could be signed, Shri Arun D. Oza, learned Counsel appearing for the opponents, appeared and mentioned that this application was to be heard along with the main petition and both these matters were to be called out today at 02-15 p.m. Today as the Court was not to assemble because of the Full Court Reference, he was not present in the Court. However, when he is informed that some adverse orders against the opponents are passed, he has come to request this Court that the same may not be signed. He has also submitted that he will intimate the learned Counsel appearing for the otherside and will file a note requesting the Court that he may be heard and thereafter, appropriate orders may be passed de-novo.

The aforesaid request is hereby accepted as the main petition i.e. Special Civil Application No. 806 of 2001 was notified for hearing today at 02-15 p.m. If Shri Arun D. Oza files any note in this respect, the Registry may list this application along with the main petition for hearing on the next date of filing of such a note.