K.C.PURI,J. - (1.) SHRI Bhupinder Singh, the then Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur, vide his impugned judgment and decree dated 9.9.2002, dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant against the judgment and decree passed by Shri Harjinder Pal Singh, the then Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Batala whereby he decreed the suit of the plaintiff with costs.
(2.) THE plaintiff filed a suit for a declaration to the effect that he was the actual consumer and owner of tubewell connection No. AP2- 1336, installed in village Khojala, Tehsil Batala and the transfer of the said connection from his name to the name of defendant No. 1 and the allotment of new connection No. AP2-1694 in the name of defendant No. 1 in lieu of tubewell connection No. AP2-1336 made by defendant Nos.2 to 4 was illegal, ultra vires, null and void, inoperative, ineffective, unauthorised, result of collusion, conspiracy of the defendants and the same has no binding force on his rights with consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering in his possession in the tubewell connection or dealing with the said tubewell connection illegally, forcibly and without due course of law on the averments that after installation of the tubewell connection No. AP2-1336, he had been regularly paying the consumption charges until these were exempted by defendant Nos.2 to 4. The defendant No. 1 without any right, title or interest in the tubewell connection in dispute, had tried to interfere in the same on 1.6.1997, but his attempt was foiled. The defendant No. 1 had informed him that he had got the electric connection in dispute transferred in his name. This transfer of connection has been impugned in the said suit. The defendant No. 1 contested the claim of the plaintiff by filing written statement. Preliminary objections of non-maintainability and suppression of material facts were taken. It was also pleaded that the plaintiff had no locus-stand to file the suit. On merits, it was asserted that the plaintiff had applied for installation of tubewell connection in Khasra No. 28R/19/2, but when the demand notice was issued, the plaintiff was not in a position to fulfil the terms and conditions of the demand notice. He was not in a position to get the tubewell connection installed. The plaintiff had approached defendant No. 1 for getting the tubewell connection from him and on payment of reasonable consideration, the defendant No. 1 got the tubewell connection installed in Khasra No. 28/21, which was in his possession. Since, the defendant No. 1 is making the payment of consumption charges to defendant Nos.2 to 4.
(3.) IT has been further pleaded that in order to give legal colour to this transaction, the plaintiff had given an affidavit to him, duly attested, by the Executive Magistrate and witnessed by the counsel for the plaintiff. On the strength of the affidavit, transfer was effected. The defendant No. 1 is, thus, in possession of electric connection.;