ORDER :

[PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to call for the records relating to the order dated 10.06.2022 passed by the learned District Munsif, Nilakottai, in unnumbered O.S.No.-- of 2022 and set aside the same.]

1. The petitioner, as plaintiff, has proposed to file a suit before the District Munsif Court, Nilakottai, seeking permanent injunction and mandatory injunction, as against the respondents herein. The learned District Munsif, by order dated 10.06.2022, rejected the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC, without numbering the suit. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner has filed the present revision petition.

2. According to the petitioner, the first respondent is a Company involved in generating electricity using solar power and they have set up their plant near the petitioner's property. In order to transmit the power generated, the first respondent has erected electric poles in the petitioner's property, without obtaining any permission. Therefore, the petitioner has proposed to file a suit, however, the trial Court has rejected the plaint stating that civil Courts do not have jurisdiction under Section 145 of the Electricity Act, 2003 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'].

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the bar as referred to under Section 145 of the Act is only with regard to the issues coming under Section 126 [unauthorized usage of electricity] and Section 127 [appeal remedy] of the Act, which is not the case herein. Therefore, the learned Counsel prayed for appropriate orders.

4. This Court considered the submissions made by the petitioner's Counsel and perused the materials on the record.

5. The language employed under Section 145 of the Act is clear and the bar of civil Court's jurisdiction is only with respect to any matter which an assessing officer referred to in Section 126 or an appellate authority referred to in Section 127 or the adjudicating officer appointed under the Act is empowered or to determine under the Act. Section 126 of the Act deals with the assessment of unauthorized use of electricity and Section 127 is the appeal remedy to the assessment order made.

6. For the sake of convenience, Section 145 of the Act is extracted as under:-

“145. (Civil courts not to have jurisdiction): No civil court shall have jurisdiction to entertain any suit or proceeding in respect of any matter which an assessing officer referred to in section 126 or an appellate authority referred to in section 127 or the adjudicating officer appointed under this Act is empowered by or under this Act to determine and no injunction shall be granted by any court or other authority in respect of any action taken or to be taken in pursuance of any power conferred by or under this Act.”

A plain reading of the above provision shows that a specific restriction is made to matters covered under Sections 126 and 127 alone. This cannot be, in any way, read as a bar to all other types of suit initiated under the Act. The case at hand is clearly not a case of unauthorized use of electricity or theft of electricity and therefore, the bar under Section 145 of the Act is not applicable to this case.

7. At the same time, it has to be seen that the remedy against unauthorized laying of electric poles is provided under the Works of Licensees Rules, 2006, issued under Section 67(1) of the Act. This issue was elaborately discussed by this Court in R.Santhana Raj v. T.N. Electricty Board, [(2012) 1 CTC 504], as follows:-

“34. As we have seen earlier, the Central Government had issued the Works of Licensees Rules, 2006 with effect from 18.4.2006. Rule 3(1) empowers the licensee, with the prior consent of the owner or occupier of any building or land, to carry out works, lay down or place any electric supply line or other works in, through or against any building, or on, over or under any land whereon, wherever or where under any electric supply line or work has not already been lawf