JOSEPHINE KALA RANI Vs. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WRIT petitioner, who is a tenant under the 4th respondent, has come before this Court with a prayer to direct the respondents to restore the electricity service connection bearing No: 333-012-1055 at No: 9, C-2 Adwave Towers, 1st floor, South Boag Road, Chennai 600 017, which was disconnected by them on 13.06.2012.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, she is a tenant in the above said premises. The landlord of the property is causing nuisance to her without assigning any reason, with an intention of evicting her by his henchmen. He has disconnected the water connection. Therefore, she has filed a suit for an injunction restraining the landlord and his henchmen claiming through him from evicting her without due process of law. She has further stated that few months back, she had accommodated about 10 working girls in her residence and she has also applied and got registered vide Registration No: 592/2012 dated 04.04.2012. After the registraiton is over, all of a sudden, the respondents with his workmen entered into the premises and without any notice, disconnected the electricity service connection. The respondents also demanded the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 12,000.00 as compounding charges and a sum of Rs. 76,000.00 as fine. Petitioner claims that she has paid the sum of Rs. 12,000.00 vide Receipt No: 2114655 and Rs. 76,000.00 vide Receipt No: 21144776. It is also stated that a suit is also pending against the landlord in O.S. No: 1926 of 2012 and I.A. No: 5165 of 2012 before the III Assistant City Civil Court. With the landlord's permission, the petitioner is running the women's hostel. The landlord ought to have given instruction that the tariff for residential purpose is not converted into commercial purpose. The landlord did not bring anything to the tenant's notice and she is not aware of the same. While so, the petitioner explained the above said reasons, the respondents, without prior information, have disconnected the electricity service connection and demanded a huge sum from the petitioner. They have also not taken any steps to consider her request. The action of the respondent in cutting the electricity without any prior information leads to miscarriage of justice. Finding no other effective remedy, petitioner is before this Court in this writ petition.

(3.) THE 4th respondent Landlord has filed a counter stating that he has let out the premises to the writ petitioner for her residential use only with the specific condition that the premises shall not be used for any commercial activity. The petitioner has suppressed material facts before this Court. He was given to understand that on the said date, there was a raid in the premises by the flying squad of the electricity department and the officers, having found that there was theft of electricity by the writ petitioner/ tenant, had thereafter caused the disconnection as per the procedure. He was contacted by the writ petitioner stating that she was caught on using the electricity illegally and she wanted his letter of consent to convert the electricity to commercial to suit her unauthorized act. He refused her request stating that he had leased out the premises only for residential use and therefore, he is not willing to issue any letter. He also moved the Rent Control Court for eviction against the tenant in R.C.O.P. No: 964 of 2012 on the file of the IX Small Causes Judge, Chennai. He is also defending the suit filed by the petitioner in O.S. No: 1926 of 2012 on the file of the III Assistant City Civil Judge, Chennai, seeking injunction against unlawful eviction. Without impleading him, the petitioner has moved this Court. However, the 4th respondent got himself impleaded thereafter. A plain reading of the affidavit and the plaint filed by her before the III Assistant City Civil Judge, Chennai, in O.S. No: 1926 of 2012 would show that she is running a Women's hostel in the name of Blue Diamond, which act is unauthorised and hence, there is also a reason in the 4th respondent's petition seeking eviction. Petitioner having committed theft of electricity, has no locus standi to approach this Court for any relief. He also prayed for dismissal of this writ petition.