V.K. Jhanji, J. - (1.) THE Respondent is a consumer of Electricity which is being supplied by the Punjab State Electricity Board (for short the Board). On 6. 12.1991, the premises of the Respondent were visited by the flying squad of the Board, At the time of checking, it was found that the Respondent was committing theft of energy by breaking the seal of the meter and the ribbets on the right side of the meter. A test was carried out by the flying Squad and it was found that they were utilising more load than what was sanctioned. The Board raised a demand of Rs. 19,73,290/ - towards penalty etc. Electric supply was also disconnected on the same very day. The Respondent filed a suit challenging the demand raised by the Board. In the suit, they also sought restoration of electric connection. Along with the suit, they also filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for ad interim direction for restoration of the electric connection. Trial Court, after hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, ordered restoration of electric connection on deposit of the amount demanded by the Board. Trial Court was of the view that the last inspection was made on 30.11.1989, and since oh 6.12.1991, the Flying Squad found that the Respondent was indulging in theft of energy, therefore, the Respondent was liable to pay the amount from 30.11.1989. This order was challenged in the Court of Additional District Judge, Amritsar, The order of the trial Court was modified to the extenet that the Respondent was directed to deposit Rs. 4,50,000/ - and to furnish security for the remaining amount. The Respondent was also directed that in case the amount is found due against them, they shall also pay interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum. This order of the Additional District Judge has been challenged by the Board in this Civil Revision.
(2.) COUNSEL for the Petitioners contended that the effective checking was done on 30.11.1989 and, therefore, trial Court rightly directed restoration of the electric connection on payment of the amount demanded by the Board. Mr. Mattewal, learned Counsel for the Respondent has placed on record various documents showing that the checking was as done by the same flying Squad not only on 30.11.1989 but also on 18.12.1990, 8.2.1991, 5.7.1991. and 8.10.1991. I have carefully gone through those documents. The test was carried on different dates so mentioned. At that time, the flying Squad did not report that the Respondent was indulging in theft. However, no definite finding can be given at this stage because this trial Court will find after the parties are allowed to lead evidence. In this view of the matter, I find no ground to interfere in the discretion exercised by the Appellate Court but in order to secure the interest of the Board, I modify the order of the Additional District judge to the extent that they shall furnish security in the shape of bank guarantee in the sum of Rs. 4,50,000/ - and for the remaining amount, security shall be furnished. This shall be in addition to the amount of Rs. 4,50,000/ - which was directed to be deposited by additional District Judge, Security shall be furnished within one month from today failing which the Board shall be at liberty to disconnect the electric connection.
(3.) MR . Sukhbir Singh, Advocate appearing for the consumer also undertakes that in case the amount is found due, then entire amount will be paid within one month from the decision of the trial Court alongwith interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum.;