(1.) There is no infirmity in the impugned order because the concerns of the petitioner have already been addressed by the following observations made by the learned trial Court :-
(2.) In view of the aforesaid when the learned trial court is conscious that the impugned letter dated 25.8.2006 being challenged by the plaintiff/respondent and being defended by the petitioner on the ground of the plaintiff/respondent having found indulged in the theft of electricity and also in view of the fact that a categoric issue has been framed regarding the validity of such a letter imposing demand on account of theft of electricity, I am of the opinion that the issue does not preclude the leading of evidence to this effect by the petitioner.