GHANSHYAMDAS BINNANI Vs. M P ELECTRICITY BOARD RAMPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against the order of the District Judge, Jabalpur, passed on 17-11-1966 in M. J. C. No. 31 of 1966.

(2.) THE applicant made an application to the District Judge stating that the non-applicant, the Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board, while exercising its statutory powers of laying a transmission line in pursuance to a sanctioned scheme has damaged his property for which he is entitled to compensation. He prayed that the same may be determined under section 16 (3) of the Telegraph Act read with section 42 of the Electricity (Supply) Act. On a preliminary objection raised by the Board, the learned District Judge has held that he has no jurisdiction to entertain the application as, in his opinion, section 42 of the Electricity (Supply) Act does not bring into play section 16 (3) of the Telegraph Act and the remedy, if any, in such a case is by a civil suit.

(3.) PART III of the Telegraph Act, 1885 to which reference is made in section 42 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, may now be examined. This part contains sections 10 to 19-B under the heading- 'Power to place telegraph lines and posts'. Leaving aside the provisions which apply to property vested in local authorities, the scheme of these sections briefly stated is as follows. Section 10 enables the telegraph authority to "place and maintain a telegraph line under, over, along or across, and posts in or upon, any immovable property". This enabling power is restricted by four provisos appended to the section. The proviso in clause (d), which enjoins the authority to do as little damage as possible and lays upon it the duty to pay full compensation for any damage caused in the exercise of its powers, is worded as follows:-