SUKHMANDER SINGH Vs. PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision-petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, for setting aside the order dated 15.06.2009, rendered by the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Faridkot, vide which it dismissed the application, under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and the judgment and decree dated 07.07.2009, rendered by the Court of I/C District Judge, Faridkot, vide which, it dismissed the appeal, has been filed by the revision-petitioner.

(2.) THE plaintiff claimed himself to be the owner in possession of the land, in question. It was stated that the land of defendant no.4 is situated on the northern side of his land. It was further stated that electricity was being supplied by defendant nos. 1 to 3,5 and 6 from the residential area of the village towards western side of the land of the plaintiff. It was further stated that defendant nos. 1 to 3, 5 and 6 in connivance with defendant no.4, were bent upon erecting the electric poles and passing the electric wires, through the field of the plaintiff, from point X towards the southern side of his land for giving supply of electricity to him (defendant no.4), although there was another short route to give the said supply from point X towards the western side of his land. Accordingly, the defendants were asked so many times, not to do so, but all in vain. Ultimately, a suit for permanent injunction was filed.

(3.) DEFENDANTS -respondents No.1 to 3 contested the suit as also the application by way of filing their joint written statement as also reply to the application, wherein, they stated that the Punjab State Electricity Board had launched a scheme for giving 24 hours electric supply to the Dhanis/Bastis, on urban pattern, having cluster of five or more houses under D.S. Division, PSEB, Faridkot, Kotkapura etc. It was sanctioned by the competent authority, from 11 KV City Feeder, Burj Harika, by giving a connection, to Bant Singh, defendant no.4, and others. It was further stated that, as per the sanctioned scheme, 19 poles had already been installed. The main line approximately 1.9 KM long had already been erected and only three poles remain to be installed to start the electric supply to the cluster of houses. It was further stated that the work was being carried out, as per the sanctioned scheme. It was further stated that no irreparable loss will be caused to the plaintiff, on account of erection of electric poles, in his land. It was further stated that neither any prima facie case, nor balance of convenience lay in his favour.