IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 15.01.2025 P.S.E.B. ...... Appellant versus Dr. Kamal Gupta ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present: Mr. Munish Gupta, Advocate for the appellant.

None for the respondent.

****

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (Oral)

1. Defendant is in appeal aggrieved of judgment and decree passed by both the Courts below. For convenience, parties hereinafter are referred to by their original position in the suit i.e. the appellant as defendant and respondent as plaintiff.

2. Plaintiff filed suit seeking decree of declaration to the effect that demand contained in memo No.5518 dated 15.12.1988 pertaining to the account in the name of the plaintiff for an amount of Rs.67,308.60/- is illegal and unconstitutional. As per the plaintiff, he is running hospital under the name and style of Kamal Hospital and is consumer of the electricity being supplied by defendant.

3. Plaintiff has been regularly paying for the electricity consumed as per the bill raised by the defendant. On 15.12.1988, Assistant Executive Engineer, Flying Squad, Khanna visited the premises of the plaintiff and inspected the connection in dispute. Meter and installation were found to be in order. Still, Inspecting staff removed the meter without any reason and without any notice. Plaintiff was asked to sign the inspection report. Plaintiff refused to sign the same. The connection was disconnected. On 16.12.1988, plaintiff received memo No.5518 dated 15.12.1988 wherein demand of Rs.67,308.60/- has been raised from the plaintiff. The demand includes overhauling enhanced security, cost of meter and re-connection fee. The meter was never sent to M.E. Laboratory. A wrong report was made with respect to tampering of the seals. Working of the nursing home run by the plaintiff was seriously crippled without supply of energy. Thus, plaintiff prayed for decree of declaration that the demand raised is illegal, null and void.

4. Suit was contested by the defendants claiming that the suit for declaration was not maintainable. On merits, defendants claimed that the Flying Squad visited the premises of the plaintiff on 15.12.1988. On inspection, it was found that all the four M&T seals were found without spot welding, but pressed. One of the M&T seals on the right bottom side of the meter with impression OKs-25 MT was found fake and tampered. One seal on the right top side of the meter was also found tampered. The lash wire of this seal was just pressed inside and same came out on touching. Meter cover could be opened with tampering of the two M&T seals on the right side of the meter, providing access to the meter digit counter for an unauthorised abstraction of energy. The existence of fake and tampered seals supported by very low consumption compared to the sanction load constituted the case of theft of energy under clause 33 of the Abridged conditions of supply read with Section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910. It being a case of theft, supply of energy was disconnected. Plaintiff was asked to deposit Rs.50,504.80/- as SOP charges, Rs.6928.80/- as electricity duty, Rs.9300/- as additional security apart from cost of meter and re-connection fee.

5. On the basis of pleadings, following issues were framed:-

“1. Whether the demand contained in memo No.5518 dated 15.12.1988 amounting to Rs.67,308.60 is illegal, unconstitutional? OPD

2. Whether the suit is not maintainable? OPD

3. Whether the plaintiff was indulging in theft of energy?

OPD.

4. Relief.”

6. While answering issue No.1 and 3, Court of the first instance found that Ex.D-2 i.e. the report of Flying Squad, all the four M&T seals were found without spot welding, but pressed. The impression was found fake and tampered. However, in the written statement, stand taken is that one number of M&T seal on the right bottom side of the meter was found fake and tampered with. Thus, the officials of the board are not sure whether the M&T seals were fake or tampered with. Fake