- (1.) The defendants-appellants are in second appeal before this Court.
(2.) The plaintiff-respondent namely M/s Associated Petrochem Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the company) filed a suit for mandatory injunction in terms of pleading that it was a company registered under the Company Act, 1956 and carried out its business as a manufacturer, producer, refiner, exporter, importer and dealer in petroleum products. The premises of the company was located on the Delhi-Rohtak Road and within the revenue estate of Sampla, District Rohtak. The company had been provided with an electric connection for the purpose of carrying on its business and the electricity charges had been paid regularly and on time. It was pleaded that in the year 1997-1998 the company had suspended its business and had surrendered the electric meter. Accordingly, the defendants-appellants had disconnected the electricity connection and at that point of time no amount was outstanding towards electricity charges from the company. Thereafter, when the company wished to commence operations again and applied for an electric connection, the defendants- appellants issued memo no.2011 dated 12.7.2006 alleging that electricity charges of M/s Lord Plywood amounting to Rs.2,24,342/- were due and as such the electric connection could not be granted. The company pleaded that M/s Lord Plywood was a separate entity and was carrying out its operations from some other premises, having a separate Board of Directors and as such had no concern with the plaintiff-company. As the defendantsappellants had refused to provide the electric connection inspite of repeated requests and since it was not possible to commence operations without an electricity connection as such the suit had been instituted.
(3.) Upon notice, defendant-appellant, U.H.B.V.N Ltd. filed a written statement taking a categoric plea that as per Nigam rules no connection can be issued to a defaulter in the same premises unless and until the payment due along with all charges is deposited. Defendant-Nigam denied that M/s Lord Plywood was a separate company and functioning from its separate premises.;