- (1.) THIS regular second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 26.03.2013 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Amritsar, whereby the suit for declaration filed by the appellants/plaintiffs has been dismissed as well as against the judgment and decree dated 22.01.2014 passed learned Additional District Judge, Amritsar, whereby the appeal preferred by the appellants against the judgment and decree of the Court of first instance, has been dismissed. For convenience sake, reference to parties is being made as per their status in the civil suit.
(2.) THE detailed facts of the case are already recapitulated in the judgments of the Courts below and are not required to be reproduced. However, the facts relevant for disposal of this second appeal are to the effect that plaintiff No.1 is registered partnership firm with plaintiff No.2 as one of its partners. Plaintiff No.2 obtained electricity connection bearing account No.GC24/0074 in his name from defendants with sanctioned load of 57.78 KW for carrying on business of plaintiff No.1 firm. Lateron load was got enhanced to the extent of 10.00 KW under VDS Scheme. Requisite charges were deposited. Load was then enhanced from 57.78 KW to 67.780 KW. Plaintiffs have been making payment of electricity consumption charges regularly to the defendants without default. Plaintiffs received bill dated 16.07.2009 for amount of Rs.1,52,620/ - in which defendants wrongly added amount of Rs.1,39,577/ - on account of sundry charges, without disclosing details thereof. Plaintiff asked defendants many times to deduct the amount of Rs.1,39,577/ - or to furnish details thereof but to no avail. Rather the defendants threatened to disconnect the electricity connection in future if the impugned amount is not paid. Plaintiffs are running banquet hall and marriage palace and have already booked various functions. If the electricity is disconnected the entire business will be ruined.
(3.) ON notice, defendants appeared and filed written statement taking preliminary objections that plaintiffs have no cause of action to file the suit. The Court has no jurisdiction to try the present suit. Plaintiffs have not come to the Court with clean hands. It has been further contended that on 23.12.2008 on inspection of the premises of the plaintiffs it was detected that in one part of the building, there was ATM of bank installed. Electricity supply to the said ATM was being provided through electric meter installed in the premises of the plaintiffs. Connected load of said ATM was calculated at 11.640 KW. In this way total load was found 79.22 KW. Plaintiffs were found using the electricity in unauthorized manner as defined in commercial circular No.53/2006. A provisional assessment order bearing No.3488 dated 26.12.2008 was served upon the plaintiffs for payment of Rs.1,39,577/ - calculated according to Rules but plaintiffs did not bother to comply with the said order nor filed any objections. Denying other allegations, prayer for dismissal of suit was made. Replication was filed by the plaintiffs denying the averments in the written statement and reiterating the averments in the plaint. Court of first instance, on the basis of pleadings of the parties, framed following issues: - "1. Whether the plaintif is entitled to relief of declaration as prayed for? OPP 2. Whether the plaintif is entitled for permanent injunction as prayed for? OPP 3. Whether no cause of action arise to plaintif to file present suit? OPD 4. Whether court has no jurisdiction to entertain and file present suit? OPD 5. Whether the plaintif has not come to the court with clean hands? OPD 6. Relief.";