ASIM DAS Vs. RAM NIRANJAN DHANUKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by one Ashim Das challenging the order No.71 dated 1.10.2010 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 1st Court at Bankura in Title Suit No.58 of 2006.

(2.) It would appear that the present petitioner as plaintiff of the suit by filing an application in the Court below prayed for installation of separate electric connection in the 'Kha' Schedule Property which happens to be part of 'Ka' Schedule Property, but the learned Court below upon hearing both sides and also considering the circumstances rejected the petitioner's application for electric connection.

(3.) Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order impugned, petitioner has come up before this Court praying for setting aside the said order and for obtaining an order of electric connection as prayed for in the Court below. Mr. P.P.Roy, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner referring to some documents being copy of rent receipt in respect of Holding No.15 for the period from 17.9.2004 to 17.9.2005 at the rate of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) per month issued by one Bijay Krishna Das as also municipal tax receipt dated 16.8.2007 as well as on receipt in the name of Bijay Das issued by Bankura Municipality on 19.1.2007 emphatically urges that his client being the occupier of the Holding No.15 of 'Kha' Schedule Property which is the part of the 'Ka' Schedule Property is entitled to have electric connection for the sake of carrying on his business on electrical goods therein. In support of his contention he has drawn this Court's attention to the contents of provision laid down in Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003, and strongly contends that in view of the position of law laid down in said Section, his client being the occupier of the premises referred to above is entitled to have electric connection. Further in support of his contention he has relied upon a decision 2009 2 CalHN 325 and strongly submits that learned Court below while passing the order rejecting the prayer for electric connection committed mistake and accordingly the order impugned needs to be set aside and his client may be allowed to have electric connection as prayed for.