JUDGMENT :

SUDHIR MITTAL, J.

1. The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for declaration that demand made in the electricity bill payable on 13.10.2017, was illegal and thus, was not recoverable. Consequent relief of injunction was also sought. The suit was decreed by the learned trial Court and appeal was dismissed by the learned first appellate Court. A decree has been passed that the amount mentioned in the aforementioned bill, is not recoverable and that memos dated 10.8.2017, are illegal and no recovery can be effected on their basis.

2. On the basis of the respective pleadings, it can be deduced that the premises of the plaintiff-respondent was checked on 8.8.2017 and it was allegedly found that he was consuming more than the connected load. Thus, notices dated 10.8.2017 (Ex. D-4 and D-5) were issued under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) for alleged theft of electricity. A provisional order of assessment was drawn up, but the same was never communicated to the plaintiff-respondent and the amount so assessed was reflected in the bill payable on 13.10.2017, which led to the filing of the present suit.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant