Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/10068/2006 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10068 of 2006
=========================================================
PASCHIM
GUJARAT VIJ CO LTD - Petitioner(s)
Versus
JAI
ASHAPURA ICE AND COLD STORAGE - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR
RC JANI for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MS SUDHA R GANGWAR for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 03/02/2010
ORAL
ORDER
By
way of this petition the petitioner has prayed to quash and set
aside the order dated 16.3.2006 passed by the Appellate authority
in appeal No. 20 of 2005.
The
brief facts of the case are as under:
2.1 The
respondent was served with the supplementary bill for the alleged
commission of theft of energy, which was challenged by way of
Special Civil Application No. 15455 of 2005, which came to be
withdrawn with a view to file an appeal before the Appellate
Authority.
2.2 The
respondent preferred an appeal bearing no. 20 of 2005 before the
Appellate Authority. The said appeal came to be decided on 16.3.2006.
The appellate authority has not considered the difference regarding
the S.S. Unit as per the supply code and MRI report. Hence
this petition.
Heard
learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the
documents on record.
Mr.
Jani Learned advocate for the petitioner contended that the finding
arrived by the authority is not just and proper. According to him
the difference regarding the S.S. Unit as per the supply code and
MRI report is found to be 90,926 units but only 7448 units were
accepted.
On
going through the documents on record, it is found that the
appellate authority has in its order in clause 4, relied upon the
MRI Report and observed that the respondent has used unauthorized
electricity for 12 days i.e. from 14-4-2005 to 26-4-2005. However
the authority has given benefit of only 7448 units, inspite of the
claim of respondent. The petitioner is not in a position to point
out anything from the record to take a contrary view. The appellate
authority has considered all the aspects of the matter in details
and deal with each point separately. Hence, I do not find any merits
in the matter and the same is therefore dismissed. Rule is
discharged with no order as to costs.
It
will be open for the petitioner to issue a bill on the basis of the
finding arrived by the appellate authority.
[K.S.Jhaveri,J.]
*Himansu
Top