The Plaintiff must pray for a declaration holding the electricity bill to be invalid before praying for an injunction against the Defendant from taking any steps for the recovery of the amounts claimed in the impugned Bill.

( 1 ) THE common question of fact and law which arises in these Petitions is whether the Plaintiff is entitled to file a Plaint in which only an injunction simplicitor has been prayed for in the wake of receiving electricity bills for sundry amounts. In Suit No. 791/1997 the learned Civil Judge has held, after considering a catena of precedents, that it was essential for the Plaintiff to pray for the passing of a declaration holding the electricity bill to be invalid before it could be entitled to pray for the consequential relief of an injunction against the Defendant from taking any steps for the recovery of the amounts claimed in the impugned Bill. On the same conspectus of facts, and appreciation of the law, several References had also been made which will be answered by this judgment.

( 2 ) THE provisions of law which are attracted are found in Section 7 (iv) of the court Fees Act. So far as the Suit Valuation Act is concerned, what is basically enunciated therein is that the relief for the purposes of the valuation of the Suit must also correspond to the valuation for the purposes of the jurisdiction. So far as Section 7 of the Court Fees Act is concerned, if it is necessary to seek a declaration before being entitled to consequential reliefs, (in the present case that of an injunction), the valuation would be different to those cases where an injunction simplicitor is prayed for. It is essential in the latter case that no legal obstacle has to be overcome before the injunction is claimed.

( 3 ) VARIOUS cases have been cited by learned Counsel. Reference need not go beyond the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in Mahant Purushottam Dass and Others v. Har Narain and Others, AIR 1978 Del 114. Echoing the words employed by the Hon ble Supreme Court in Shamsher Singh v. Rajinder Prashad and others, AIR 1973 SC 2384 the Full Bench has opined that the question whether the relief of injunction prayed for by the Plaintiff should be considered as a consequential to the main relief or not has to be decided on the basis of the allegations and the prayers contained in the plaint. Mere astuteness in drafting the plaint will not be allowed to impede the Court from looking at the substance of the relief asked for. No purpose will be served in multiplying citations.

( 4 ) M/s. Time Properties and Promoters v. Delhi Development Authority, AIR 1986 delhi 317 has been relied upon by the Plaintiff. In that case a learned Single Judge of this Court was concerned with a factual matrix in which an injunction had been prayed for against the threat of re-auctioning of the plots and the for feiture of a sum of Rs. 6. 5 lacs calculated by the DDA as earnest money. The Court took into consideration the uncontrovertible position that a primary school was avowedly functioning on the plot in question. It was in those circumstances that the learned single Judge opined that it was unnecessary to seek a declaration in respect of the legal impropriety of the threatened re-auctioning of the plot and the forfeiture of the earnest money.

( 5 ) IT cannot be gainsaid that the primary document to be looked at is the plaint, and if no controversy is created from an intelligent reading thereof, one need not go any further. Let us take the case of a Suit for partition where indubitably the Plaintiff has been ousted from possession of any joint family properties but this fact has been glossed over or incorrectly stated in the plaint. From the Written Statement, or documents placed before the Court by the Defendant, if it is manifestly evident that the Plaintiff has made a narration which is not factually correct, it would be open to the Court to arrive at a conclusion adverse to the Plaintiff.

( 6 ) IN the present cases the Defendant has raised electricity bills. There may be instances where on a bare perusal of the facts before the Court, either contained in the plaint or in the Written Statement, and the documents placed by the parties,