KRISHAN LAL SAROHA Vs. UHBVNL AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Krishan Lal Saroha-petitioner has filed this civil revision petition against respondents Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited through Executive Engineer and SDO OP Sub Division under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 22.10.2013 (Annexure-P.6) passed by learned Additional District Judge, Sonepat along with the order dated 15.6.2011 (Annexure-P.7) passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sonepat, vide which the application filed by the petitioner under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. has been dismissed by the learned Courts below.

(2.) The brief facts as stated in the petition are that the plaintiff/petitioner filed a suit against defendants for declaration with consequential relief of permanent injunction for setting aside the checking-report dated 11.8.2010 and notices dated 4.10.2010 being illegal, wrong, void ab initio. The plaintiff/petitioner is having one single phase electrical connection in his Dharam Kanta at Sonepat and he has been making payment of the bill of the said connection regularly. It is also stated that the officials of the defendant/respondent checked the above said connection and prepared a false and arbitrary checking-report observing that both company seals suspected to be tampered. Meter was removed and packed in a cardboard box in the presence of the consumer duly signed by checking party and the consumer.

(3.) Both the Courts below have held that it was a case of theft of energy of electricity and, notices were issued for orders of assessment by licensee for the offence of theft under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Thereafter, defendant No.2 issued a notice vide memo No.2564 dated 4.10.2010, vide which the amount of Rs. 2,14,422/- was imposed as penalty (on account of theft of electricity i.e. assessing order), but the plaintiff did not raise any objection to defendant No.2 under Section 126 of the Act and second notice dated 4.10.2010 was issued to the plaintiff demanding Rs. 80,000/- for compounding the offence of theft of electricity, against which the plaintiff had not raised any objection.