- (1.) The C.M.A. is filed by the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board and two others, who arc the" defendants in O.S. No. 84/91 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Narasaropet. This C.M.A. is directed against the order dated 26-4-1991 in I.A. 637/91 in O.S. No. 84/91 granting interim injunction preventing the appellants herein from disconnecting power supply for non-pay merit of arrears of electricity consumption charges due from the respondent Andhra Cements Limited, Dachepalli "till talks coming into effect between petitioner, Government and respondent." The lower Court has held that the three units of the respondent Andhra Cements Limited are in adverse financial position and the balance convenience lies in their favour for granting the facility of payment of dues by instalments at the rate of Rs. 75 lakhs per month commencing from 20-5-1991 onwards towards the current and future consumption charges. It is obvious the only reason given by the Court below for restraining the Electricity Board from disconnecting the power supply for default in the payment of arrears is that the three units of the respondent-company are in adverse financial position and therefore the facility of instalments is to be given to them.
(2.) It is rather curious to note that the order of injunction has been passed by the Court below without giving a notice to the defendants in the suit. It is stated that if a notice is given to the other side, it will defeat the purpose of filing the petition for the grant of an interim injunction. Nothing more is said in the order for dispensing with the notice. Under Order 39, Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, it is provided that the Court shall in all cases, except where it appears that the object of granting the injunction would be defeated by the delay, before granting injunction, direct notice of the application to the opposite party. It may be noticed that the suit and the W.A. were filed 10 days after the expiry of the time fixed for payment of the bills issued by the appellants herein. Under these circumstances, it cannot be said that a few more days delay caused due to the giving of notice to the other side would have resulted in defeating the very purpose for which the petition for injunction was filed before the lower Court. The lower Court, therefore, committed a serious judicial error in not issuing notice to the other side before granting injunction in this matter.
(3.) It is also evident from the facts of the case that the Court below had chosen to issue the order of injunction restraining the appellants herein from the recovery of arrears of consumption charges due from the respondent in sheer disregard of a judgment of this Court in C.M.R. No. 1545/90 and batch dated 4~4-1991. In the said judgment of the Division Bench between the Andhra Cement Company Limited and the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board and others it was categorically held that the respondent-Andhra Cement Limited cannot be given the facility of payment of arrears by instalments. In fact, the Division Bench observed that it cannot fail to consider the difficulties of the Board in having to maintain supply to a company which had been a continuous defaulter. In the face of such judgment of the Division Bench denying the facility of instalments to the respondent herein and also holding that the electricity supply is liable to be disconnected for want of payment of such arrears, the Court below ought not to have issued the order of injunction which is the subject matter of appeal before us. Evidently, the respondent has been making every effort to delay payment of the arrears due from it towards the supply of electricity which runs into crores of rupees and at the same time has been trying to ensure the uninterrupted supply of electricity to its units.;