High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. MANIKUMAR
Rangasamy - Appellant
Versus
The Superintending Engineer & Others - Respondents
C.R.P.(PD) No.1461 of 2005
Decided On : 13 September 2006
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 26.09.2005 in I.A.No.373 of 2005 in I.A.No.1127 of 2002 in O.S.No.233 of 2002 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sankari (Full Additional Charge by the II Additional District Munsif, Salem).
Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order rejecting the prayer for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner.
2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the Civil Revision Petition are as follows :-
(i) The petitioner is the plaintiff in the suit. According to him, he is the owner of the service connection No.1111, which is situated in Survey No.209/10 of Kaveripatti Agraharam Village, Sankari Taluk, hereinafter called the suit service connection. He had applied for service connection for a well and had obtained necessary certificate from the Village Administrative Officer, Koneripatti Village. The certificate and other particulars were submitted to the Electricity Board authorities for the purpose of obtaining service connection for the well situated in his land. The plaintiff is also the owner of the land situated in S.F.No.208 and R.S.No.108/1B of Koneripatti Village along with his brother, the fifth defendant in the suit.
(ii) Electricity Board authorities are the defendants in the suit. They have effected service connection to the well on 14.05.2001. Subsequently, Electricity Board authorities issued notice to disconnect the service connection on the ground that the petitioner has obtained service connection to the well situated in R.S.No.209/10, by producing a false certificate from the Village Administrative Officer, Koneripatti Village. The petitioner/plaintiff submitted that he is an illiterate and the Village Administrative Officer, Koneripatti Village has wrongly issued a certificate and that while he was taking appropriate steps to rectify the mistake, the Electricity Board authorities issued a notice for disconnection of the service connection, which necessiated him to file a suit for mandatory injunction.
(iii) The respondents/defendants have filed a written statement stating that the petitioner/plaintiff opted to get agricultural service connection under the revised self financing scheme and that he submitted the revenue records relating to R.S.No.208/1B of Koneripatti Village. After collecting the necessary charges, the Agriculture service connection was given to the well in R.S.No.208/1B of Koneripatti Village on 14.05.2001 in Service Connection No.1111. On verification, it was found that there was no well at R.S.No.208/1B of Koneripatti Village and the well to which the service connection was effected is actually situated in R.S.No.209/10 of Kaveripatti Agraharam Village. It was further found that the plaintiff had obtained service connection by submitting false records. As per clause 28.01 (b) of the Terms and Conditions of supply of Electricity, the authorities can disconnect the service connection after giving notice and hence there is no illegality in their action. Hence, they prayed for dismissal of the suit.
3. Pending disposal of the suit, the plaintiff filed I.A.No.1127 of 2002 for ad-interim injunction restraining the Electricity Board Authorities from in any way dismantling the suit service connection and the Lower Court was pleased to grant ad-interim injunction. When the injunction application was posted for hearing, the plaintiff filed a petition for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to locate the suit well by measuring S.F.Nos.208/1B and 209/10 and for filing the report of the Advocate Commissioner. The said application was resisted by the Electricity Board authorities on the ground that all the Revenue records relating to the location of the area, boundaries, location of well are very much available and that the petition for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner has been filed only to protract the proceedings. The Court below considered
SupremeToday
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.