Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Uhbvnl & Anr vs Raj Kumar Sharma on 25 September, 2014

Author: Hari Pal Verma

Bench: Hari Pal Verma

                           Regular Second Appeal No.4416 of 2014                            -1-




                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                                                     AT CHANDIGARH


                                                         Regular Second Appeal No.4416 of 2014
                                                         Date of Decision:-25.09.2014


                           Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and another

                                                                               ...Appellants

                                                         Versus

                           Raj Kumar Sharma

                                                                               ...Respondent


                           CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARI PAL VERMA


                           Present:-      Mr. K.S. Malik, Advocate
                                          for the appellants.

                           HARI PAL VERMA J.(Oral)

The plaintiff-respondent has filed the suit for declaration against the appellants-defendants for declaration to the effect that the impugned notice of assessment dated 26.3.2009 issued under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003, asking the plaintiff to deposit an amount of Rs.1,54,124/- and the notice dated 26.3.2009 on account of compounding the offence of theft of electricity under Sections 135 and 152 of the Electricity Act, 2003 are illegal.

The learned trial Court, though, has observed that the notice of assessment has to be made under Section 126 of the Act and not under Section 135 of the Act but held that this is only a mere irregularity on behalf of the assessing officer and it does not falsify the very factum of theft. The trial Court has also observed that against the order of VIJAY ASIJA 2014.09.30 11:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Regular Second Appeal No.4416 of 2014 -2- assessment, the plaintiff was required to file appeal before the appropriate authority under the Act as the notice was issued under Section 126 of the Act and jurisdiction of the Civil Court would have been clearly barred in that eventuality. The trial Court held that the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is barred and under the Electricity Act and the appellate authority is the appropriate authority to adjudicate such issues.

Feeling aggrieved against the said judgment and decree dated 28.2.2013, the plaintiff filed civil appeal under Section 96 CPC and the lower Appellate Court vide judgment dated 28.4.2014 maintained the judgment and the decree passed by the trial Court and accepted the appeal to the effect that notice dated 26.3.2009 is illegal and is not binding on the plaintiff. Accordingly, a decree for permanent injunction restraining the respondents-defendants from recovering any amount on the basis of said notice was passed in favour of the plaintiff. While passing the judgment dated 28.4.2014, the lower Appellate Court has granted liberty to the Authority to pass a fresh order of assessment of penalty amount and compounding fee by adopting proper procedure as provided under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003.

Since the lower Appellate Court has granted liberty to the appellant i.e. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. (UHBVNL) to pass a fresh order of assessment and there is complete mechanism to decide such case, no cause survives to the defendants-appellants. Accordingly, I find no infirmity or illegality in the impugned judgment dated 28.4.2014 passed by the lower Appellate Court.

There is no substantial point of law, which need to be adjudicated in the present appeal. Accordingly, the present regular VIJAY ASIJA 2014.09.30 11:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Regular Second Appeal No.4416 of 2014 -3- second appeal is dismissed in limine with no order as to costs.

                           September 25, 2014                       ( HARI PAL VERMA )
                           Vijay Asija                                     JUDGE




VIJAY ASIJA
2014.09.30 11:12
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document