VRUNDAVAN PLASTICS Vs. DAKSHIN GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These applications are filed seeking permission to add the Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi ("BIS" for short) as party respondent No.6. According to the applicants, considering the reliefs prayer for in the main petitions, highly technical issues with regard to functioning of electric meters is in question and therefore, BIS being an independent authority and a certifying agency, is required to be added so as to assist the Court on the technical issues.

(2.) Learned Advocate for the applicants submitted that the applicant of SCA No.11574 of 2020 is a partnership firm having two partners. One of two partners, one of the partners Mr.Gopalbhai Girdharbhai Pipaliya is 12th standard failed and other partner Mr.Kiranben Hiesbhai Pipaliya has done his Bachelor Degree in Arts. The applicant has no technical knowledge of functioning of metering instrument. The manufacturing company claims that the meters sold by the manufacturing company to the distributing company are of world class and the International Meter Specified Agency has certified that the meter contains all the parameters prescribed by the Institution and also the parameters provided by BIS and therefore, said meter is having ISI certificate and also the certificate of International Meter Certifying Agency, named and called as DLMS. The parameters prescribed by the aforesaid two agencies provide that the meter should be absolutely tampering free and in any case, if anybody tries to tamper with the meter, such attempts would be recorded by the meter instrument, 400 in number - 200 each on forward and reverse position. There is inbuilt memory in the bottom of the meter which records all incidents and the instrument keeping memory kept at the bottom of the meter is free from any tempering. In these circumstances, the allegations made against the applicant of having used world class instrument, however, in the opinion of the respondents is the device is unknown to them, but having the latest technology which can be tamper the meter within such meter without causing any damage or leaving any evidence of any damage to synthetic meter box, body of the meter, body of the terminal cover, display board which is obviously made from the glass or any transparent materials, be it plastic or otherwise, the name plat of the meter and more particularly, the thin metallic wires used by the respondent for constructing of seal applied in the meter, on the body of the meters, terminal box and lastly on synthetic body of the meter. This kind of instrument only is the existing in the imagination of the respondent. The respondent claims that the applicant is so genius that the applicant has found out such a magic instrument to tamper with the metering instrument. This is nothing but pure and simple humbug of the respondent, which is being stated to mislead this Court and to prejudice against the applicant. It is submitted that it may be noted that the allegations are being made that one Mr.Dhirubhai Vekaria allegedly abetted in this offence. However, his role of abatement has not been specifically disclosed. Be it may, the co-accused in some of the cases in group of petition Mr.Dhirubhai Vekaria is also semi-illiterate and his education qualification is 10th Standard failed. In the opinion of the deponent of the affidavit in reply filed in this petition, the applicant and Mr.Dhirubhai Vekaria are genius who have invented such an instrument to defraud the respondent company. In these circumstances, it would be most appropriate and essential to bring the certifying agency before this Court, so that all the factual matrix are brought before this Court to adjudicate the issue involved in these petitions in just and proper manner. It is submitted that it may not be expedient for this Court to adjudicate the issue involved in these petitions in absence of certifying agency and therefore, certifying agency is proper party before this Court as its presence would facilitate this Court to adjudicate the issue involved in just and expedient manner.

(3.) As against this, learned Advocate for the respondents-caveator submitted that the applications are misconceived inasmuch as, BIS is neither proper nor necessary party. In the petitions, there are no prayers sought against said party nor any averments /allegations are made against such party.