ABDUL RAHMAN Vs. EGMAL SEIKH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. J.C. Gaur, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. B. Choudhury, the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents 2, 6, 7 & 8. The Standing Counsel, ASEB Mr. N. Goswami, appears for the respondents 3, 4 & 5. The petitioner is the plaintiff in the Title Suit No. 17/1999 before the learned Civil Judge Jr. Division, Tezpur. He applied for a perpetual injunction under Section 38 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") to prohibit the defendants from disconnecting electricity to the schedule house, under Holding No. 2961 of Ward No. 13 within the Tezpur Municipal Board. According to the plaintiff, he was legitimately occupying a plot of land at Polo field of Tezpur town taken on lease from the owner Abdul Gafar in the year 1951 and he constructed a house on the said land with due permission from the Tezpur municipal authorities.

(2.) SUBSEQUENTLY the landowner Abdul Gafar donated his property for charitable purpose to the Dakhowali Panchayat and thereafter the plaintiff paid monthly rent to the successor owner. After residing without electricity for some years, the occupier applied for power connection to the ASEB and after formalities were completed, electricity supply was given to the suit premises on 30.1.1999. But on complaint of the Secretary of the Dakhowali Panchayat, the ASEB issued a notice on 5.3.1999 directing the plaintiff to produce a No Objection Certification from the Dakhowali Panchayat or otherwise, the electricity will be disconnected. Thus when the optimum enjoyment of his leased property with electricity was threatened, the plaintiff applied for protection under the Act by filing the suit.

(3.) THE aggrieved plaintiff then filed the Title Appeal No. 25/2006 but the learned Appellate Court opined that perpetual injunction can only be granted where there is existing obligation in favour of the plaintiff and since injunction can be granted to prevent the breach of an existing obligation and noticing the absence of obligation in plaintiff's favour, the Title Appeal No. 25/2006 was found to be without merit and the same was accordingly dismissed on 23.3.2009 (Annexure -F).