Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Om Parkash vs Line Incharge on 11 March, 2014

Author: Mehinder Singh Sullar

Bench: Mehinder Singh Sullar

            Civil Revision No.1826 of 2014                                                      1

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                                      CHANDIGARH


                                                             Civil Revision No.1826 of 2014

                                                             Date of Decision:-11.3.2014

            Om Parkash
                                                                             ......Petitioner
                                                   Versus
            Line Incharge, Amit Kumar & Ors.
                                                                             .....Respondents


            CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR.



            Present:           Mr.Parminder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

            MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR, J. (Oral)

The challenge in this revision petition by petitioner-plaintiff Om Parkash son of late Mata Ram (for brevity "the plaintiff"), is to the impugned order dated 20.11.2013 (Annexure P2), vide which, the trial Court has dismissed his application for ad interim injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with section 151 CPC and the order dated 3.2.2014 (Annexure P3), by means of which, his appeal was dismissed as well by the appellate Court.

2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, having gone through the record with his valuable help and after bestowal of thoughts over the entire matter, to my mind, there is no merit in the instant petition in this respect.

3. As is evident from the record that the Central Government has formulated a Scheme, to erect the electricity transmission line from Meerut to Moga, as envisaged in Section 164 of The Electricity Act read with Arvind Kumar Sharma 2014.03.13 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Civil Revision No.1826 of 2014 2 Sections 10 & 16 of The Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, after obtaining the technical approval and sanction of the Ministry of Power Government of India. It is not a matter of dispute that the appropriate authority can use the land for the purpose of laying the transmission line without acquiring it. However, the persons interested would be entitled to the compensation for the use of their land under the indicated Acts. Therefore, the plaintiff cannot injunct the defendants to stop the commissioning of electricity transmission line. Taking into consideration the entire material & relevant facts, the trial Court has correctly dismissed the injunction application of the plaintiff, vide impugned order (Annexure P2).

4. Not only that, the order of trial Court was upheld by the appellate court, by virtue of impugned order (Annexure P3), which, in substance, is as under :-

"Further in Power Grid Corporation of India Vs. Rajbir Singh and others 2009(5) RCR (Civil) 742 it has been held that the project of national importance creating infrastructure are not be interfered with. It has further been held that the courts have to be extra cautious in dealing such cases. It has also been held that the petitioner (Power Grid Corporation of India) has absolute right to install power in exercise of power under the Electricity Act read with Telegraph Act. The land owner has a right to receive compensation on account of using of the land for installation of tower and transmission line. It has also been held that the plea that change in route which led to increase in the length of transmission line and will cost more to the petitioner is not the domain of owners to examine or to challenge the same in court as it is the job of the experts to have to consider every aspect of the matter. In view of the law laid down in the above referred authorities, defendants cannot be restrained from erecting towers or laying lines in the suit property. However, the plaintiff is entitled to the compensation as per the damage caused or as per rules on the subject. In addition to this, it may be pointed out here that Section 145 of the Electricity Act specifically bars the courts from issuing injunction in respect of any action take or to be taken in pursuance of any power conferred by or under the Act. Thus no grounds are made out to interfere in the order passed by learned Lower Court and the same is hereby, affirmed."

5. Meaning thereby, the Courts below have examined the matter in right perspective and have concurrently recorded the cogent grounds in this regard. Such orders, containing valid reasons, cannot possibly be interfered with, in the exercise of superintendence power of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, unless and until, the same are illegal, perverse and without jurisdiction. Since no such patent illegality or legal infirmity has been pointed out by the learned counsel for petitioner, so, the impugned orders (Annexures P2 & P3) deserve to be and are hereby maintained in the obtaining circumstances of the case.

6. No other point, worth consideration, has either been urged or pressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

7. In the light of aforesaid reasons and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of trial of main suit, as there is no merit, therefore, the instant petition filed by the petitioner-plaintiff is hereby dismissed as such.

8. Needless to mention that nothing observed here-in-above would reflect on the merits of the case, in any manner, as the same has been so recorded for the limited purpose of deciding the present petition only.

Sd/-

(Mehinder Singh Sullar) Judge 11.3.2014 AS Arvind Kumar Sharma 2014.03.13 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh