- (1.) Defendants are in second appeal against the judgements and decrees passed by the courts below, whereby the suit for declaration filed by respondent/plaintiff was decreed by the trial court and in appeal filed by the defendants, the findings of the trial court were upheld and appeal was dismissed.
(2.) Facts necessary for the decision of the present appeal are that plaintiff/respondent filed a suit alleging therein that he was consumer of defendants for having installed electric connection at his flour mill against payment of regular bills. It was alleged that on 7.3.2009 the premises of the plaintiff was checked by the officers of the defendants/appellants in his absence and after checking, meter and other equipment were removed by the checking team after disconnecting the electricity and he was issued a memo dated 7.3.2005 alleging therein that the electric meter was found tampered with and it was a case of theft of electricity and as such a penalty of Rs.4 lacs was imposed upon the plaintiff. It was alleged by the plaintiff that the checking was not conducted in his presence and the memo dated 7.3.2005 was issued without hearing him and as such the same was liable to be set aside.
(3.) Upon notice, defendants/appellants filed joint written statement controverting the assertions made in the plaint. It was alleged that flour mill of the plaintiff was checked by Vigilance Wing consisting of Anil Garg, A.E.E. Vigilance Hisar and SDO OP Rania and it was found that the meter installed at the premises of the plaintiff was tampered with as lower and upper portion of the same were refixed with some adhesive. It was thus alleged that since plaintiff committed theft of energy therefore, he was served with impugned memo dated 7.3.2005 under Sections135/152 of the Electricity Act,2003 and the plaintiff was bound to pay the penalty imposed upon him.;