( 1 ) THIS is the plaintiffs second appeal. He succeeded in the first court in a suit for malicious prosecution which was decreed for Rs. 500. 00 in his favour but the first appellate court reversed that judgment.

( 2 ) SURAT Singh, the appellant, filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 500. 00 against four respondents. The suit was brought on 11-5-1970. Defendant No. 3 was the Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi. He is not being proceeded against and is not a respondent before me. There are, therefore, three respondents who were originally defendants Nos. 1,2 and 4. As the title would show defendant No. 1 is the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, a body corporate constituted under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957. Defendant No. 2, Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking (for short the DESU ) is one of the undertakings of the first defendant under the aforesaid Act. One of the purposes of the DESU is to provide electricity to various persons. Under Section 277 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, Delhi Municipal Corporation have all the powers and obligations for a licensee under the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 (for short the Electricity Act ) in resp