- (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 10th February, 1968, of the Senior Civil Judge, Ganganagar.
(2.) FIRM Sadul Shahr Cotton Ginning and Pressing Factory Sadulshahr whose supply of electricity for the purpose of running the factory remained disconnected from 28th March, 1965, to 15th April, 1965, instituted the present suit against the rajasthan State Electricity Board (hereinafter to be referred as the Board) for recovery of Rs. 10,993/- as damages. The suit is founded both on tort and on contract, but the lower court has found that no agreement was executed between the parties, although plaintiff's case was that it had submitted the agreement to the defendant but the same was not returned after completion. The ground ran the basis of contract is not pressed in this Court. It was also alleged in the court below that the disconnection was due to the malicious action of Shri Prishan Singh, assistant Engineer of the Board, who wanted to disconnect the plaintiff's supply of energy on 8-2-1965 also but it could not be done then due to the intervention of the Additional Chief Engineer who happened to be there on that date. However supply of energy was disconnected on 28th March. 1965, without any legal justification. Due to the aforesaid disconnection, the plaintiff could not fulfil the commitments which he had made with third parties and thus suffered a loss of Rs. 10,993/ -.
(3.) IT is not disputed that in the first instance, plaintiff was supplied 100 H. P. energy which was increased to 125 H. P. on 16-1-1965. Though the case of the defendant in the lower court was that connection was given to the plaintiff temporarily on his request for testing the machinery, there is no substance in this plea because in paragraph 14 of the written statement it is admitted that the power supplied to the plaintiff was given to run the factory. Again this plea is not borne out by the letters which were exchanged between the parties when connection was given. 3-A. It is admitted that the plaintiff was disconnected from 28th March, 1965, to 15th April, 1965, though it is denied that it was due to any malicious act on the part of the employees of the Board including Shri Prishan Singh. It was also denied that the plaintiff suffered damages due to the disconnection. The plea of the defendant is that the disconnection was effected in order to make it convenient for the railway authorities to inspect the over-head electric crossing and the overhead electric crossing could not have been energised unless the permission of the railway authorities was obtained. The railway authorities characterised the action of the Board in energising the over-head high tension crossing as unauthorised and so the Divisional Superintendent, Northern Railway Bikaner demanded that the crossing should be de-energised for inspection. It was also stated that Section 82 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, is a bar to the suit.;