KANTABEN SHANTILAL THAKKAR Vs. SURAT ELECTRICITY COMPANY LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition is filed challenging the notice dated 11h July 1997 bearing No. DN/ 68/05/0994. It is stated in the notice that the bill dated 28. 06. 1997 pertaining to the period from 22. 05. 1997 to 21. 06. 1997 for an amount of Rs. 1,48,429. 37 is not paid though the time to pay the said amount has expired on 08. 07. 1997. The petition was affirmed on 18th day July 1997 and was filed on the same day with an urgent note. Notice was issued on 18. 07. 1997 returnable on 24. 07. 1997. The petitioner was permitted to serve the respondent by direct service. The matter had thereafter been adjourned to 28. 07. 1997, 04. 08. 1997, 07. 08. 1997 and 08. 08. 1997. On 08. 08. 1997 the Court passed an order that, "absent. Dismissed. " Later on, the matter was restored on an oral request and was adjourned to 14. 08. 1997. On 14. 08. 1997, again the matter was dismissed as the learned advocate for the petitioner was not present. However, it was again restored on an oral request and was adjourned to 21. 08. 1998. Thereafter, the matter was adjourned to 02. 09. 1997 and 10. 09. 1997. On 10. 09. 1997 the court again passed an order that, "absent. Dismissed. " Again the matter was restored on an oral request and adjourned to 18. 09. 1997. The matter, thereafter, was adjourned to 03. 10. 1997, 08. 10. 1997 and 13. 10. 1997. On 13. 10. 1997 again the Court passed order that, "absent. Dismissed. " Again the Court restored the matter on oral request and adjourned to 21. 10. 1997. The matter then after was adjourned to 13. 11. 1997, and thereafter was listed on 01. 04. 1998. On that the Court again issued notice returnable on 01. 05. 1998. The matter was thereafter adjourned to 22. 06. 1998, and 20. 07. 1998. On 20. 07. 1998, the Court passed the following order:

(2.) THE matter thereafter is listed today. Today, when called out, learned advocate for the petitioner is not present.

(3.) THE petition is filed challenging the notice issued by Surat Electricity Company Limited. The said notice is contended to be arbitrary, unreasonable, illegal, whereby it is stated in para 2 of the petition that the company has called upon the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 4,35,349. 37. It will be worth noticing that the amount mentioned in the Notice dated 11. 07. 1997 produced at Annexure 'a' to the petition is Rs. 1,48,429. 37, and not Rs. 4,35,349. 37. The averments made in para 5 are required to be taken into consideration, which read as under: