JUDGMENT

1. The judgment and decree passed in Special Civil Suit No.188 of 2003 by the 2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Dholka dated 15.12.2010 partly allowing the suit of Uttar Guj Vij Company Limited (‘UGVCL’, for short) permitting to assess the supplementary bill from June, 2000 to 02.08.2000 for illegal use of the electricity by Ashah Ice Factory and others (‘the factory’, in short) and to recover 6% interest is challenged by the UGVCL.

2. The factual aspects and brief facts are that the factory and his owner Siddiqbhai Mohamadyusuf was the customer of UGVCL with Customer No.27211 / 00238 / 7 since 24/25.04.1994. According to UGVCL, on 02.08.2000 surprise checking was carried out by the UGVCL Officer at premises of the factory and found malpractice as the electricity meter (having broken glass of iron box of the meter) was not found in proper condition having meter glass found broken and scratches on running counter. The Electricity Officer having removed the electricity connection subsequently under the provisions of Electricity Act and Rules thereof prepared supplementary bill of Rs.09,48,835.05 ps an served the same to the factory in August, 2000. Subsequent thereto, factory was also served with the electricity bill of Rs.3620/- for regular consumption. However, the factory did not pay any of the amount which lead to discontinue the contract. According to plaintiff, total outstanding amount was Rs.9,52,455.07 ps. Rs.6800/- which was paid earlier as security deposit by the customer was deducted.

3. In the aforesaid premises, UGVCL filed Special Civil Suit to recover Rs.9,45,555.07 ps with the interest from Asha Ice Factory. The suit was resisted by multiple defense with the specific defense that on 19.04.2000, the Electricity Company checked the electric connection of factory and found that the electric meter was running slow by 18.4%. Thus, on 25.04.2000, supplementary bill of Rs.12,069.68 was given which the factory had paid. Another bill was given on 23.05.2000 of Rs.2050.40 which was also for slow running of the meter. Third bill was given on 17.06.2000 which was of Rs.7844.36, which was again bill for slow running of the meter. It is, therefore, contended that last checking was done on 17.06.2000 and on that day no malfunction was found with the electric meter. Thus, the electricity company is entitled to issue supplementary bill from 17.06.2000 till the date of checking. Additionally, it is contended that on 18.07.2000 and 02.08.2000, the factory requested the UGVCL to discontinue the connection permanently and to close the contract between the parties and the electricity connection was discontinued on that count and, therefore, there is no reason to believe that the factory has malfunctioned with the electric meter.

4. The learned trial Court permitted both the parties to lead evidence and after framing issues was pleased to partly allow the suit on aforesaid terms.

5. Being aggrieved, the UGVCL is before this Court.

6. Heard learned advocate Mr.Hasurkar appearing for the UGVCL. When the matter is taken up for hearing, none present for the factory.

7.1 Mr.Hasurkar, learned advocate for UGVCL, in his short argument, mainly submitted that the modus operandi of the factory can be inferred that he has not questioned the findings of slowness of meter and continued to operate slow meter to commit the theft. He submitted that further findings of the electricity company that the factory indulged in malfunctioning of electric meter and committed theft is also not challenged by the respondent herein. He would submit that surprise checking carried out on 02.08.200 remained unquestioned and un-controverted as no challenged has been made against such surprise checking.

7.2 Mr.Hasurkar, learned advocate further submitted that conditions under the Indian Electricity Act, therefore, permits the Electricity Company to assess the electricity bills for six months prior to date of checking and exactly in same way electricity compan