MAYARANI RAM Vs. CESC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide order dated 5.1.1999, the Forum dismissed the case on the ground that the dispute between the parties is actually one between the landlord and the tenant.

(2.) The case of the complainant in short is that one Manmohan Singh since deceased was a tenant under OP-2 and the complainant is the daughter of the brother-in-law of the said tenant. A civil suit was filed by OP-2 against the said tenant for eviction. During pendency of the said suit the tenant died and the petitioner was substituted in his place. As there was no electric connection, the petitioner prayed for electric connection and deposited the requisite amount. But OP-1 did not give the electric connection to the premises presently occupied by her. The case was contested by OP-1 by filing written objection wherein it has been stated that no connection can be given to the premises because of objection by OP-2.

(3.) It appears that the Forum observed that the dispute between the parties is essentially one between landlord and tenant. One Manmohan Singh was the tenant under OP-2. The said tenant died during the tendency of the suit brought by OP-2. The petitioner claims herself to be heir of the said tenant. It is evident that a civil suit is pending between the parties after the petitioner was substituted in place of the original tenant. The petitioner has failed to establish that the status and legal occupation of the premises in question. In our view until and unless the status and legal occupation of the premises in question is decided in favour of the petitioner, she cannot succeed. In our view the Forum has correctly decided the points in dispute and we find no reason to interfere with the judgment. The appeal is without merit and is dismissed on contest.