(1.) By this judgment, I am disposing of ten appeals bearing Nos. RSA 3283 of 1997 to 3292 of 1997 as the points of fact and law are similar in all these appeals. It may be relevant to note here that vide order dated 7-5-1998, it was made clear that all these appeals will be finally disposed of.
(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that one Executive Engineer/Flying Squad had checked the premises of the plaintiff in all these cases and it was found that two connections bearing No. MS-1/45 and MS-1/47 were installed in the same premises though each of the two meters were in the name of separate persons who happen to be real brothers. The appellant-department took the view that since both the meters have been installed at the same premises, both the meters were required to be clubbed together. After the checking by the Executive Engineer/Flying Squad, the SDO (Billing) of the appellant-department sent the supplementary bills for recovery of the amount on the basis that both the meters should be clubbed together. These supplementary bills were challenged by the respondent-plaintiffs in the ten suits filed before the learned trial Court which have given rise to these appeals. The learned trial Court vide judgment dated 4-10-1996 decreed the suits of the plaintiffs-respondents and held that the appellant-department was not entitled to recover the amount of the supplementary bills. It may, however, be relevant to point out that in the written statement filed by the appellant-Board before the learned trial Court, a plea was taken that the suits filed by the plaintiffs were not maintainable.
(3.) Aggrieved by the judgment dated 4-10-1996 passed by the learned trial Court, the appellant-Board filed appeals in all these cases and the learned lower appellate Court vide judgments dated 12-6-1997 dismissed all the appeals filed by the appellant-Board. The aforesaid judgments passed by the learned lower appellate Court have been challenged in all these appeals.