1. The Electricity Board and the Assistant Engineer of the Board, who were defendants 3 and 2 in O. S. No. 312 of 1974. are the appellants in the second appeal. The plaintiff was a tenant of a building, of which the owner was the 1st defendant. The lease arrangement commenced on 1-11-1971. It is alleged in the plaint that the 1st defendant bad installed a 10 Horse Power Electric Motor in the building with Huller and that consequent thereto the rent was enhanced. There appears to have been some disputes between the landlord and the tenant. It is unnecessary to refer to those matters in this second appeal. The 1st defendant applied to the Assistant Engineer of the Electricity Board for disconnecting the electric connection to the building. The plaintiff protested In view of the apprehension about the possible disconnection by the 2nd defendant, the suit was filed for an injunction for restraining the 2nd defendant and officers of the Board from effecting any such disconnection as had been attempted earlier. The dispute raised by the 1st defendant in the suit is not relevant for the purpose of the second appeal. The Electricity Board and the Assistant Engineer contested th