Back
High Court Of Delhi
SCINDIA POTTERIES PRIVATE LIMITED,A.S.GORAYA - Appellant
Versus
PUROLATOR INDIA LIMITED - Respondent
L.P.A. 69 of 1979
Decided On : 02/22/1980
TELEGRAPH ACT - INSTALLATION OF TELEPHONE LINES AND POLES - DISCONNECTION BY LANDLORD - RESTORATION OF TELEPHONE CONNECTIONS - INTERPRETATION OF SECTIONS 10, 11, 16(1), 17, 19A - POWER OF TELEGRAPH AUTHORITY - RESISTANCE OR OBSTRUCTION - JURISDICTION OF DISTRICT MAGISTRATE - RIGHT TO ALTER POSITION OF POST OR TELEGRAPH LINE - NOTICE OF INTENTION TO EXERCISE PROPERTY RIGHTS - MALA FIDE DISCONNECTION - PENAL OFFENCE.
Fact of the Case:
M/s Scindia Potteries Private Ltd. (Appellant) owned land in Sarojini Nagar, New Delhi, known as the "Scindia Potteries Area." M/s Purolator India Ltd. (Respondent) was a tenant in some of the buildings in the area. In April 1973, the Telegraph Authority placed telegraph lines and poles in the Scindia Potteries Area and provided telephone connections to M/s Scindia Potteries Private Ltd. and M/s Purolator India Ltd. Disputes arose between the landlord and tenant, leading to litigation. The landlord alleged that M/s Purolator India Ltd. was misusing the premises and had shifted offices to the tenanted premises in violation of the lease and the Master Plan. The landlord issued notices to the Telegraph Authority and the General Manager, Delhi Telephones, requesting the removal of telephone connections. In October 1978, the landlord disconnected the telephone lines going to the premises of M/s Purolator India Ltd.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the installation of telephone lines and poles by the Telegraph Authority was a valid exercise of power under Section 10 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (the Act). The court found that the landlord's alleged oral protests at the time of installation did not constitute resistance or obstruction as contemplated by Section 16(1) of the Act. The court also held that the landlord's unilateral disconnection of the telephone lines was illegal and mala fide, as it was done to force M/s Purolator India Ltd. to vacate the premises rather than in any bona fide exercise of property or other right. The court further held that the landlord's reliance on the notice of the Delhi Development Authority regarding alleged misuser of the property was not a valid ground for disconnection, as the proceedings under the Delhi Development Act were unrelated to the exercise of power by the Central Government or the Telegraph Authority under the Act.
Issues: 1. Whether the installation of telephone lines and poles by the Telegraph Authority was a valid exercise of power under Section 10 of the Act. 2. Whether the landlord's alleged oral protests at the time of installation constituted resistance or obstruction as contemplated by Section 16(1) of the Act. 3. Whether the landlord's unilateral disconnection of the telephone lines was legal and justified. 4. Whether the landlord's reliance on the notice of the Delhi Development Authority regarding alleged misuser of the property was a valid ground for disconnection.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The power conferred by Section 10 of the Act is absolute and does not require compliance with the provisions of Section 16(1) of the Act. The exercise of power under Section 10 is only subject to resistance or obstruction, in which case the Telegraph Authority may approach the District Magistrate under Section 16(1). 2. Mere oral protests by the landlord at the time of installation do not constitute resistance or obstruction as contemplated by Section 16(1) of the Act. 3. The landlord's unilateral disconnection of the telephone lines was illegal and mala fide, as it was done to force M/s Purolator India Ltd. to vacate the premises rather than in any bona fide exercise of property or other right. 4. The landlord's reliance on the notice of the Delhi Development Authority regarding alleged misuser of the property was not a valid ground for disconnection, as the proceedings under the Delhi Development Act were unrelated to the exercise of power by the Central Government or the Telegraph Authority under the Act.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal filed by the landlord, M/s Scindia Potteries Private Ltd., and upheld the order of the Single Judge directing the Telegraph Authority to restore the five telephones and teleprinter line within one week.
( 1 ) THIS appeal conies to us under Clause X of the Letters Patent, as applicable to this court, from a judgment dated March 19, 1979 given by a learned Single Judge of this Court.
( 2 ) THIS is a case which illustrates how in a private dispute between the parties Government can get unnecessarily involved. The appellants before us are M/s Scindia Potteries Private Ltd. and its Managing Director. Shri A. S. Goraya while the respondents are the Union of India, The General Manager, Delhi Telephones and M/s Purolator India Ltd. M/s Scindia Potteries Private Ltd, owns about 30 acres of land in the area commonly known as Sarojini Nagar, New Delhi. This property of M/s Scindia Potteries Private Ltd. is known as the "scindia Potteries Area". It is enclosed by a boundary wall. There are a number of sheds and buildings in the area. M/s Purolator India Ltd. are tenants in some of these buildings. In April, 1973 the Telegraph Authority under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (hereinafter called the Act) placed telegraph lines and poles in and over the Scindia Potteries Area. Telephone connections were given to M/s Scindia Potteries Private Ltd. and M/s Purolator India Ltd. Two telephone connections were given to M/s Purolator India Ltd. in February, 1974 and three were given later some time after May, 1978. A teleprinter line was also connected to the premises in the occupation of M/s Purolator India Ltd. It seems there were some disputes between M/s Scindia Potteries Private Ltd. and M/s Purolator India Ltd. which has led to litigation between the two parties. It is alleged that premises had been rented to M/s Purolator India Ltd. for godowns but in violation of the terms of the lease and permitted land use in the Master Plan, M/s Purolator India Ltd. have shifted offices to the tenanted premises. It is also alleged that in consequence the Delhi Development Authority has given notice to M/s Scindia Potteries Private Ltd. to show cause why action should not be taken against it under Section 14 read with Section 29 (2) of the Delhi Development Act. 1957 for permitting user of its buildings in contravention of the provisions of the Master Plan. On April 30, 1978 M/s Scindia Potteries Private Ltd. is said to have issued a notice to the Director-General, Posts and Telegraphs, New Delhi, the Secretary, Ministry of Telecommunication, New Delhi, the General Manager, Delhi Telephones and Divisional Engineer (Funds), Hauz Khas Exchange, New Delhi that M/s Purolator India Ltd. are getting telephone connections to perpetuate misuser by them of the premises in their possession, that such misuser is contrary to and in violation of the rights of M/s Scindia Potteries Private Ltd. and that the telephone connections should be removed forthwith failing which M/s Scindia Potteries Private Ltd. would have no option but to remove the same at the Government s cost, risk and responsibility. Another notice to the same effect is purported to have been issued by M/s Scindia Potteries Private Ltd. on August 31, 1978. On October 9, 1978 the appellants are said to have themselves disconnected or caused to be disconnected the telephone lines going to the premises of M/s Purolator India Ltd. The request of M/s purolator India Ltd. for restoration of these lines not having been acceeded to, they filed a petition in this court for issue of a writ of mandamus directing the relevant governmental authorities to restore the telephone connections of the five telephones and the teleprinter line. It was alleged that restoration was not being granted at the instance of the virtual owner and proprietor of M/s Scindia Potteries Private Ltd. who had personal influence over the former Central Minister of Communication. The name of the virtual owner and proprietor mentioned is Smt. Vijaya Raje Scincia while that of the Minister is mentioned as Shri Brij Lal Verma. It is also said that the Additional General Manager, Delhi Telephones told Mr. K. Sairam of M/s Purolator In
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
