VEERASWAMI, J.

These two petitions, in which the petitioner is the same, raise an interesting question as to whether electricity is "goods" for the purpose of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959, and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 297 US 288; 80 L. Ed. 688). Section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, as a matter of fact treats electricity as property which is capable of theft. The section says that whoever dishonestly abstracts or consumes or uses any energy shall be deemed to have committed theft within the meaning of the Indian Penal Code. I note that the section uses the word "deemed" but none the less, I am inclined to think that it is in the contemplation of the Electricity Act that electricity is property and movable at that, capable of being stolen by dishonest abstraction, consumption or user of energy, also capable of distribution and sale. Sir Dinshah Mullah in his work on Sale of Goods Act, would appear to have thought that electricity, like gas and water, was not "goods". Two learned Judges of the Calcutta High Court in Rash Behari v. Emperor 1936 AIR(Cal) 753, 766), agreed with this view and observed :

"Sir Frederick Pollock and Sir Dinshaw Mullah in