RAM RACHHPAL JETHI Vs. NONE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed against the order dated 14.6.2005 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ludhiana, vide which the appeal filed by respondent No. 1 herein against the order dated 21.5.2005 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Ludhiana, refusing the restoration of the electricity to the demised premises, has been allowed.

(2.) It is not in dispute that the respondent No. 1 herein was running business in the demised premises under the name and style of M/s. Jethi Engineering Works along with the wife of the petitioner namely Sunita Rani. She retired from the partnership on 31.3.2004. Thereafter all the assets and the liabilities of said firm were taken over by the respondent herein.

(3.) Learned trial Court on the basis of pleadings and material placed before it came to the conclusion that as the respondent was in possession of the property in dispute, therefore, he was entitled to an ad interim injunction. Learned trial Court, therefore, granted a temporary injunction retraining the petitioner from dispossessing the respondent herein from the property in dispute except in due process of law. However, the other application of the respondent for restoration of the electricity was refused. The respondent went in appeal before the learned Additional District Judge, who came to the conclusion that the respondent herein was in possession of the premises in dispute and, therefore, he was entitled to use the electricity and disconnection thereof would cause an irreparable loss and injury to him. Learned lower Appellate Court also came to the conclusion that plaintiff respondent herein being in occupation of the premises in question had prima facie a case for restoration of electricity. It was also held by the learned lower Appellate Court that the balance of convenience was also in his favour.