URUDHAMALAI Vs. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the second respondent rejecting the petitioner's application to give Electricity connection to the petitioner's property.

(2.) According to the petitioner, he is the owner of the property in Survey No.953/1A in Sankaralingapuram, Viruthunagar District, and he has purchased the property from one Ramaiah Chettiyar in the year 2003, and thereafter, he is in possession and enjoyment of the property. Earlier the third respondent herein filed a suit against the petitioner in O.S.No.207 of 2004 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Virudhunagar, for declaration and permanent injunction. The suit was dismissed holding that the suit property belongs to the petitioner. Subsequently, an appeal in A.S.No.44 of 2010, on the file of the Sub Court, Virudhunagar, was filed by the third respondent, that appeal was also dismissed. Challenging the judgment and decree a second appeal is pending before this Court. In the above circumstances, when the petitioner submitted an application seeking electricity service connection, by the impugned order dated 23.05.2014, the second respondent had rejected the said application on the ground that, a second appeal No.687 of 2012 is pending before this Court. Challenging the said order, the petitioner is before this Court, with this writ petition.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the suit filed by the third respondent in O.S.No.207 of 2004 was dismissed holding that the suit property belongs to the petitioner and the appeal filed by the plaintiff/third respondent was also dismissed, confirming the judgment of the trial Court, now a second appeal is pending on the file of this Court against the concurrent judgment, however, the pendency of second appeal cannot be bar for considering the petitioner's request for grant of service connection, hence the impugned order is liable to be set aside.