R S E B Vs. DEEPAK OILS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal on behalf of the Rajasthan State Electriciry Board has been preferred against the judgment and decree of the learned Addl. District Judge, Bhilwara. M/s. Deepak Oil Mills plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for declaration with following averments. Plaintiff's Firm was a registered partnership firm having Rang Lal and Mahesh Kumar as partners. It was carrying on the business of oil production and its sale. The Firm had taken electric connection from the Rajasthan State Electricity Board having account No. 3-6-21. The oil mill which was being run by the plaintiff-respondent was seasonal and used to work from November to May every year. The Firm had an electric meter of 60 horse power. The Electricity Board sent a supplementary bill No. 443709 on 23-3-79 by registered post which mentioned the average consumption. It amounted to Rs. 21.158.40/- and was payable till 11-4-79. It was also mentioned in the letter enclosed with the bill that the body seal and the terminal seal of the meter were found broken and the average consumption of three months was taken into consideration. As such the plaintiff-respondent was asked to deposit Rs. 21.158.40/- till 11-4-79. He was to deposit an amount of Rs. 25.816.40/- after due date. It was also averred that an amount of Rs. 230/- as penalty for breakage of body seal and terminal seal was paid and a sum of Rupees 300/- was also paid as the rent of current transformer. The said bill was issued by the Asstt. Engineer who was not authorised to issue. It was further averred that the allegation of theft of electricity or misuse of electricity by illegal means was false. The meter was not tested in the laboratory nor there was any basis to issue the questioned bill. The plaintiff was alleged to have broken the body seal and terminal seal of the meter for which penalty had been paid and the bill sent by the Electricity Board was illegal. A declaration was sought that the electricity connection may not be disconnected, and the amount of Rs. 25.816.40/- be not recovered from the firm.

(2.) In reply the Board submitted that the factory was not seasonal and that on 2-11-79 the Asstt. Engineer (Vigilance) checked meter and found body seal and terminal seal broken. With the result on 24-11-79 new meter was installed. The bill was prepared on the basis of three months' consumption as shown in the new meter. It was admitted that an amount of Rs. 530/- was received by the Electricity Board. It was submitted that it was not necessary to get the meter tested from the laboratory. That the court-fee paid by the plaintiff was insufficient. It was also averred that the connection was first installed on 1-7-74 but since the meter stopped working new meter was installed on 9-8-74. It was found that the meter was tampered with and hence third meter was installed on 4-10-76. This meter was checked and its body seal and terminal seal were found broken. A panchnama was prepared. The meter was not giving correct reading and the bill was issued correctly on the basis of average. The trial Court framed following issues :

(3.) Plaintiff examined Rang Lal and defendant examined D.W. 1 Laxmi Narain. Learned Addl. District Judge after hearing the parties decreed the suit.