STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. PRATAP AMICHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision has been filed by the State of Gujarat through the Inspecting Officer (Court Fees) Surat from proceedings arising from Regular Civil Suit No. 148 of 1991. The present respondent No. 1 had filed the suit as plaintiff against the present respondent Nos. 2 and 3 as defendant Nos. 2 and 3 respectively.

(2.) The plaintiffs case, as set out in the plaint, was to the effect that he has an electric connection No.R.434 at his residential premises that he pays regularly the consumption charges for electricity consumed through the meter that due to certain grievances against him the second defendent had visited his residence on 13th August 1992 and on false allegations of theft of power and misconduct on the part of the plaintiff, the second defendant had taken away the electric meter that thereafter the plaintiff was presented an additional bill for Rs. 6,066.36 ps. followed up by a notice dated 10th September 1991 threatenting disconnection in case of non-payment of the said bill. The plaintiff averred in the plaint that he had not committed any theft of electricity nor any misconduct in respect of the meter, that there was nothing wrong with the meter and that the procedure followed by the second defendant on 13th August 1992 during his visit to the plaintiffs residence was totally illegal unwarrnted and malafide. The plaintiff therefore sought a declaration that the procedure followed by the second defendant on 13th August 1991 was illegal and also that the consequential notice dated 10th September 1991 was also illegal. The plaintiff further prayed for a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from enforcing the said notice threatening disconnection for non-payment of the bill in question.

(3.) The plaintiff valued the suit at Rs. 300 and affixed the court fee stamp of Rs. 30 on the plaint apparently on relying upon the provisions of Section 6(iv)(i) of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959.