PRAKASH TATIA,J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the appellant as well as learned Counsel for the respondents.
(2.) These two appeals are decided 1wv this common judgment because of the reason that while admitting S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 29/1983, a question of law was framed by this Court on 20th April, 1983 and S.B. Civil Appeal No. 40/1988 has been admitted only because of the reason that same issue is involved in S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 40/1988. Therefore, the substantial questions of law involved in these two appeals is one and the same. '
(3.) It appears from the facts of the case that in both the suits plaintiffs submitted that the Rajasthan State Electricity Board (for short R.S.E.B.) has issued wrong bill against the plaintiff for electricity consumption. In S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 20 of 1983, the amount claimed by the R.S.E.B. is only Rs. 1359.59/-, which according to plaintiff was wrongly recovered by the R.S.E.B. Therefore. the plaintiff in the above appeal (in Civil Original Suit No. 37/80) claimed decree of Rs. 3325.59/in total and the Trial Court granted decree of Rs. 1325.59/alongwith interest ) 12% per annum and the Appellate Court dismissed the appeal of the Electricity Board vide judgment and decree dated 27th September. 1982.;