MANOJ SHARMA Vs. JODHPUR VIDHYUT VITRAN NITAM LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A suit for declaration and injunction was filed by the petitioner-plaintiff before the Addl. Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) and Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Bikaner along with an application for temporary injunction against the respondent-defendants, in which, it is pleaded that he has taken shop and house above the shop on rent from respondent No. 3, for which, he is regularly making payment of rent as per the rent-deed. There is family dispute in between respondent No. 3 and petitioner, therefore, respondent No. 3 wants to evict the petitioner from the premises by any means. In the premises in which the petitioner-plaintiff is in possession as tenant, he has obtained electricity connection because he is running diagnostic center in the name of "Jeevanraksha Diagnostic Center" for which licence was obtained in the name of wife of the petitioner, Smt. Anju Sharma. Respondents No. 1 and 2 disconnected the electricity connection of the premises of the petitioner in pursuance of the vigilance checking made on 16.7.2007, for which, VCR No. 205/43 was made. In pursuance of VCR, a settlement was arrived at in between the parties, under which, the amount was deposited by the petitioner in two equal installments.

(2.) The grievance of the petitioner is that again a vigilance checking was made on 6.8.2008 in the rented premises of the petitioner and a vigilance check report was prepared, in which, there is no allegation of tampering with the electricity meter and only allegation is with regard to breaking the outer body seal of the meter. A reply to the vigilance report was filed and, thereafter, the matter was compounded and amount of Rs. 26,250/- was deposited by the petitioner. The respondent No. 3 being landlord wants to evict the petitioner from the premises in question. It is worthwhile to observe that the electricity connection is in the name of respondent No. 3 landlord but the petitioner being tenant is regularly depositing the amount, therefore, after second vigilance check for which the matter was compounded, a dispute arose when the provisional assessment was made by the Department and civil liability of Rs. 2,27,797/- was created by the Assistant Engineer against respondents; but, due to non-payment of the said demand electricity supply of the petitioner tenant has been discontinued.

(3.) In the suit, a temporary injunction application filed by the petitioner-plaintiff, he has challenged the validity of the outstanding civil liability raised by respondents No. 1 and 2. The trial Court after hearing both the parties granted interim injunction in favour of the petitioner vide order dated 17.8.2011, whereby, specific direction was issued to the respondents to restore the electricity connection in the premises in question of the petitioner-plaintiff tenant.