Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
AO/147/2010 1/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
APPEAL
FROM ORDER No. 147 of 2010
=================================================
PASHCHIM
GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD A BODY CORPORATE & 1 - Appellant(s)
Versus
RIDDHI
PLASTIC INDUSTRIES - Respondent(s)
=================================================
Appearance
:
MS
LILU K BHAYA for Appellant(s) : 1 - 2.
None for Respondent(s) :
1,
=================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI
Date
: 26/05/2010
ORAL
ORDER
Heard
learned advocate Ms.Lilu K. Bhaya for the appellants-original
defendants. The appellants are before this Court being aggrieved by
judgement and order dated 10th May 2010 passed by the
learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Morbi below Exh.5 in Special
Civil Suit No.26 of 2010. The operative part of the order reads as
under:
This
application is hereby partly allowed. The defendants of this suit are
hereby directed to receive Rs.3,37,544-05 (Three las thirty seven
thousand five hundred forty four & paise five only) i.e. as an
assessed amount/ electricity charges from the plaintiff. On paying
the same by the plaintiff and after receiving the said amount the
electric meter of the plaintiff be reconnected forthwith.
(emphasis supplied)
The plaintiff
of this suit is hereby directed to deposit Rs.9,04,000/- (Rupees nine
lacs four thousand only) as an amount of compounding charge in this
court. The plaintiff would be at liberty to receive the said amount
for the purpose of compounding the charge against him as per legal
procedure and in accordance with the law applicable to that behalf.
.. .. ..
2. The
learned advocate submitted that the learned Judge has committed error
in not giving any justification for directing the defendants to
receive Rs.3,37,544.05 and for directing the plaintiff to deposit
Rs.9,04,000/- in the Court. The learned advocate submitted that the
matter is pertaining to theft of electric energy employing some
external device, whereby the meter gets hung and it stops recording
the energy consumption. The learned advocate invited attention of
the Court to letter dated 13th May 2010 from Larsen &
Toubro Limited, the manufacturer of the meter. The learned advocate
for the appellants also invited attention of the Court to an order
dated 26.03.2010 passed by this Court in Appeals From Order No.81 to
88 of 2010 requesting that a similar order be passed.
3. ADMIT.
(RAVI
R. TRIPATHI, J.)
karim
Top