Karnataka High Court
Shri Kaverappa vs Shri Gundappa on 8 March, 2018
Author: S.Sujatha
Bench: S.Sujatha
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF MARCH 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA
W.P.No.44518/2014
&
W.P.Nos. 51686-687/2014(GM-KEB)
BETWEEN:
1. SHRI KAVERAPPA
S/O LATE LAKSHMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
(SENIOR CITIZENSHIP NOT CLAIMED)
RESIDING AT
KALKERE VILLAGE
HORAMAVU POST, K R PURAM HOBLI
BANGALORE EAST TALUK
BANGALORE 560043
2. SHRI PRAKASH
S/O KAVERAPPA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
RESIDING AT
KALKERE VILLAGE
HORAMAVU POST, K R PURAM HOBLI
BANGALORE EAST TALUK
BANGALORE 560043
3. SHRI VENKATESH
S/O KAVERAPPA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
RESIDING AT
KALKERE VILLAGE
HORAMAVU POST, K R PURAM HOBLI
2
BANGALORE EAST TALUK
BANGALORE 560043
4. SHRI MANJUNATH
S/O KAVERAPPA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
RESIDING AT
KALKERE VILLAGE
HORAMAVU POST, K R PURAM HOBLI
BANGALORE EAST TALUK
BANGALORE 560043
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI: G A SRIKANTE GOWDA, ADV.,)
AND
1. SHRI GUNDAPPA
S/O LATE MUNIHANUMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS
RESIDING AT
KALKERE VILLAGE
HORAMVAU POST, K R PURAM HOBLI
BANGALORE EAST TALUK
BANGALORE 560043
2. SHRI SEENAPPA
S/O LATE MUNIHANUMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
RESIDING AT
KALKERE VILLAGE
HORAMAVU POST, K R PURAM HOBLI
BANGALORE EAST TALUK
BANGALORE 560043
3. THE ASSISTANT
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
BESCOM, E-8
BANGALORE 560043
... RESPONDENTS
3
(BY SRI: K. DIVAKAR FOR
SRI:K SUMAN, ADV, FOR R1 & 2)
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER
ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTRIES IN THE ELECTRICITY
BILLS (ANNEX-G1, 8EDLG60753 ANNEX-G2 8EDLG59883
& ANNEX-G3 5EDLG11970 PASSED BY THE R-3 -
ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER; DIRECT THE R-3 TO
RESTORE THE ENTRIES IN RELATION TO METER NOS.
5EDLG11970, 8EDLG59883 AND 8EDLG60753 IN THE
NAMES OF 1ST PETITIONER IN THE ELECTRICITY BILLS,
ETC..
THESE WRIT PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT
MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioners have called in question the entries in the electricity bills at Annexure-G1, G2 & G3 issued by 3rd respondent - Assistant Executive Engineer inter- alia seeking for a direction to 3rd respondent to restore the entries in relation to Meter Nos.5EDLG11970, 8EDLG59883 and 8EDLG60753, in the name of the 1st petitioner in the electricity bills.
4
2. It is the contention of the petitioners that Late Sri.Lakshmaiah, father of the 1st petitioner and grand father of petitioner Nos.2 to 4 purchased the property bearing Old Kaneshumari No.88, new House List No.227, measuring East-West 25 feet and North South 55 feet and adjacent property along with Sy.No.68 and Sy.No.256 from one Sri.Maddurappa, which are situated at Kalkere Village, Horamavu Post, K.R.Puram Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk, since then the petitioners are in possession and enjoyment of the said properties.
3. It is contended that respondent Nos.1 and 2 made illegal attempts to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners and tried to dispossess them from house properties in the year 1976-77. The petitioners resisted the same. 5
4. In the year 1990, petitioners applied for the electricity connection and obtained Meter No.5EDLG11970 from the KEB. Thereafter, separate meter numbers were issued, since petitioner Nos.2 to 4 started residing separately in the house property. The said additional two meter numbers being 8EDLG59883 and 8EDLG60753, all together three electric meters were installed in the property in question.
5. It is contended that attempts were made by respondent Nos.1 and 2 again on 16.01.2014 to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioners. Hence, a representation dated 20.01.2014 was submitted before respondent No.3 requesting not to transfer the electrical connections, which were standing in the name of respondent Nos.1 and 2. Subsequently, O.S.No.638/2014 was filed before the Principal II Civil Judge, Bangalore Rural District, seeking for permanent injunction and the said Court on 03.05.2014 passed an 6 order granting temporary injunction. Despite the same respondent No.3 started issuing the electricity bills from the month of August 2014 in the name of respondent Nos.1 and 2. Being aggrieved by the same, these writ petitions are filed.
6. Reiterating the grounds urged in the writ petitions, Sri.G.A. Srikante Gowda, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the respondent No.3-BESCOM, without issuing notice or passing any transfer order, proceeded to issue electricity bills in the names of respondent Nos.1 and 2, relating to the meter standing in the name of the petitioners, which is contrary to the well established principles of law and hit by the principles of natural justice. It is thus submitted that a direction has to be issued to respondent No.3 to restore the electricity supply in the name of the petitioners and bills shall be issued in their names.
7
7. Learned counsel Sri.K. Divakar for Sri.K.Suman appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 referring to Regulation No.36.01 of the conditions of supply of electricity and distribution licenses in the State of Karnataka submitted that an installation can be transferred from one consumer to another person, subject to the following Conditions:-
a) "The registered consumer shall furnish a consent letter for transferring the installation and also the deposits held in his name to the transferee.
Note-In the absence of the consent letter from the registered consumer, the transferee shall produce any one of the following documents in respect of such installation-
(i) Proof of ownership of the installation in the form of Registered sale deed or partition deed or katha/succession or heirship certificate or deed of last Will.
(ii) Proof of occupancy such as valid power of attorney or latest rent paid receipt or valid lease deed in respect of only non-commercial lighting and non-commercial combined lighting and heating installations.8
8. It is submitted that the property in question was purchased by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 under registered sale deed dated 15.11.1973, Khata was transferred in the name of those respondent Nos.1 and
2. The 1st respondent was paying the taxes to the Village Panchayat earlier and after the properties came under the jurisdiction of the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike, the 1st respondent is paying taxes to the BBMP.
The encumbrances of the property in question indicates that respondent Nos.1 and 2 are the owners in possession of the property in question. That being the position any interim injunction order passed by the trial Court in O.S.No.638/2014 would not lend any assistance to the petitioners to claim their right, title and ownership over the property in question. In the absence of the consent letter given by the registered consumer viz., petitioners herein, respondents produced property documents which clearly discloses that 9 respondent Nos.1 and 2 are the owners. Considering the same, electricity bills are issued in the name of respondent Nos.1 and 2 and the same does not warrant any interference by this Court.
9. Learned counsel Sri.G.C. Shanmukha, appearing for respondent No.3 supports the arguments advanced at the hands of the learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
10. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perusing the material placed on record, it is evident that the petitioners have submitted a representation before respondent No.3 requesting not to transfer the electricity connections standing in the name of the 1st petitioner, in view of the interference made by respondent Nos.1 and 2 as alleged. Subsequent to which O.S.No.638/2014 has been filed before the competent Civil Court and interim temporary 10 injunction is in operation since 03.05.2014. The petitioners are claiming to be the owners of the property in question, similarly respondent Nos.1 and 2 are asserting their rights over the property in question. Thus, it is an admitted fact that it is a property dispute between the petitioners and respondent Nos.1 and 2, which requires to be adjudicated in the competent Civil Court.
11. The regulation No.36.01 of the conditions of the supply of electricity and distribution licenses in State of Karnataka contemplates for transfer of installation (change in the name of consumer). It is clear that in absence of consent letter from the registered consumer, on the proof of ownership of the installation in the form of Registered sale deed or partition deed or khata/succession or heirship certificate or deed of last Will, if any produced by the independent transferee, the installation can be transferred from registered consumer 11 to another person, who is transferee. However, there should be an order passed by the competent authority in transferring the installation assigning reasons. In the absence of any order without hearing the registered consumer despite submitting a representation, abruptly issuing the bills to the installation in the name of respondent Nos.1 and 2 cannot be sustained.
12. Hence, the impugned bills at Annexures-G1, G2 and G3 are quashed. Respondent No.3 shall restore entries of the installation in the name of the petitioners and bills shall be issued in the name of the petitioners, subject to the result of O.S.No.638/2014.
With the aforesaid observations, writ petitions are disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE RR