( 1 ) * * * *

( 2 ) BRIEFLY the appellant-plaintiff namely Bhavnagar Salt and Industrial Works Pvt. Ltd. (for short referred to as the plaintiff-Salt Works Company filed a suit the same being Special Civil Suit No. 29 of 1987 in the Court of the learned Civil Judge (S. D.) Bhavnagar against the respondent-defendant (for short hereafter referred to as the defendant G. E. Board) and two others inter alia praying for a declaration that two bills that of (i) first consolidated bill dt. 7-7-1986 for a period from November 198 3/06/1986 and (ii) a revised bill dt. 25-7-1986 being arbitrary and illegal were not binding and that the defendant- G. E. Board was not entitled to recover the said disputed bill; and for a permanent injunction against disconnection of electric supply for not depositing the disputed bill amount with the defendant G. E. Board The plaintiff-Salt Works Company also filed an application Exh. 5 for the interim injunction which was granted by the trial Court on a condition that the plaintiff-Salt Works Company will pay up the outstanding bill amount to the tune of Rs. 1 59 323 ps. (Rupees one lac fiftynine thousand three hundred remedy three and Paise twenty six only) in the office of the defendant-G. E. Board on or before 1989

( 3 ) FEELING aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned conditions interim injunction order below Ex. 5 the plaintiff-Salt Works Co. has preferred the present Appeal From Order before this Court.

( 4 ) I have been told at the Bar by Mr. K. S. Nanavati learned Advocate for the plaintiff-Salt Works Co. that so far out of the total outstanding bill amount of Rs. 1 59 323 ps. only his client has by various instalments in all deposited Rs. 1 16 447 ps. only to the defendant-G. E. Board leaving behind the balance of Rs. 42 885 ps. unpaid to the defendant-G. E. Board. Mr. M. A. Panchal the learned Advocate for the respondent-defendant has not disputed the same.

( 5 ) MR. Nanavati the learned Advocate for appellant-plaintiff has made a serious grievance regarding the arbitrary and illegal way of saddling the plaintiffs-Salt Works Company with huge bill liability to the tune of Rs. 1 59 323 ps. Mr. Nanavati in order to make good this submission has relied upon certain observations made by the trial Court itself in para-10 of its judgment where the trial Court has severely criticized the gross inaction of the defendant-G. E. Board for 32 months in not taking the meter reading and sending the bills pursuant to that to the plaintiff-Salt Works Company right from November 1983 till June 1986. In the said para the trial Court has also observed that the time has ripened for the defendant-G. E. Board to take appropriate stern action against the delinquent officers in order to regularise and set right the administration in the Board.

( 6 ) AS against the above Mr. Panchal the learned Advocate appearing for the defendant-G. E Board submitted that the trial Court has rightly exercised its judicial discretion in grating the conditional interim injunction in favour of the plaintiff-Salt Works Company and that no case has been made out by the appellant-plaintiff calling for any interference by this Court at this interim stage of the proceedings. Mr. Panchal also invited my attention to certain relevant paragraphs and in particular Para-11 of the impugned judgment and order wherein the trial Court has commented upon the unworthy conduct of the plaintiff-Salt Works Company which is a Private Limited Company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act in not taking any care to complain before the defendant-G. E. Board regarding not reading of the electric meters and receipt of the bills for the electric consumption made by it despite taking the advantage of producing the salt with the help of electricity of the Board. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

( 7 ) WHILE parting I cannot help referring to the observations made by the trial Court in paras 10 11 and 12 of its judgment which if they are tru