I.P. Mukerji, J. - (1.) This is a very interesting electricity matter. There is a public company, limited by shares by the name of Moody Properties Limited. It appears to be a family company of the Modis. This company owns the property numbered as premises No. 8A, Middleton Street, Kolkata-700 071. This is a four storeyed building. A private limited company Garutman (Literary Agent) Pvt. Ltd. is a tenant in respect of the ground floor, at least a part of if not the whole and a part of the first floor of the property. According to the admission made in the affidavit of the sixth and seventh respondents at least a part of the ground floor is in possession of one Rekha Mody the widow of Padampat Mody, representing one branch of the Modi family.
(2.) Gita Devi Mody is the widow of Bhagwati Prasad Mody. She has two sons Pravin Kumar Mody and Pawan Kumar Mody representing another branch of the Mody family. The mother and sons are the fifth, sixth and seventh respondents and are admittedly in occupation of 550 sq.ft. on the first floor. Pawan applied to CESC Limited for electricity connection to the first floor of the said premises. Pravin applied for connection to the ground floor. The application forms are annexures to affidavit-in-opposition filed by CESC Limited (see pages 16 and 18A). The applications were made on 8th May, 2015. Pravin declared himself to be the owner of the premises and granted wayleave permission to CESC Limited to install the meters (see pages 19 and 20 of the said affidavit). The fifth, sixth and seventh respondents say that these two additional meters were taken to supply electricity to the first floor servants' quarters, pump room and out house (see paragraphs 4(i)) of their affidavit.
(3.) The writ petitioners say that the respondent licensee ought not to have granted electricity connection to these respondents. The premises belong to Moody Properties Limited a public company limited by shares. These two meters were being granted to Pawan and Pravin personally without the consent of the company. They were installed and made operational without even making an inspection. The application form was full of mis-representation. Pawan held himself out to be in occupation of the first floor of the said premises, whereas Pravin held himself out to be in occupation of the ground floor in their respective application forms and claimed electricity to these portions. In the other document for wayleave permission Pravin held himself to be the owner of the premises. Although in her affidavit-in-opposition Gita Devi Mody described herself as a tenant this position was denied by the writ petitioners. However her occupation of 550 sq.ft. on the first floor was admitted by them. It is said in the said affidavit that one Rekha Mody was in occupation of the ground floor. Therefore, Pravin could not claim himself to be in occupation of that floor and apply for a meter. The first floor had sufficient lighting and there was no need for two meters or either of them, to light the servants' quarters, pump room and out house etc. Therefore, according to the petitioners neither Pawan nor Pravin is the owner of any part of the property. They or their mother are in occupation of a part of the first floor only. They were not in occupation of the ground floor. Electricity was not required for the ground floor as it was already electrified. Therefore, the two meters were wrongfully granted to them.;