RSTR Vs. NARAIN RAM
LAWS(RAJ)-1996-11-18
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on November 19,1996

Rstr Appellant
VERSUS
NARAIN RAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

SHIV KUMAR SHARMA, J. - (1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order dated 16.12.1995 and 8.8.1995 respectively passed by the District Judge, Sikar and Civil Judge (Senior Division) Danta Ramgarh, whereby the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC by the plaintiff non -petitioner has been allowed.
(2.) BRIEF facts are that the plaintiff instituted a civil suit in the trial court along with an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC stating therein that he applied for 'one Pole Scheme connection' and for that purpose he deposited Rs. 1,000/ - with the Assistant Engineer. RSEB Danta Ramgarh. The Board had released certain connections in serial order and the plaintiff non -petitioner has been placed at No. 1, but the employees of the Board wanted to breach the priority and are releasing the connections to others, as such the Board be restrained from releasing electric connections to any body else in breach of priority of the present non - petitioner. In reply to the application, the defendant petitioner admitted that the non -petitioner had deposited Rs. 1,000/ - in 'One pole scheme connection'. But the allegation of releasing connection out of priority has been denied. It has been categorically stated in the reply that the plaintiff -non - petitioner was involved in committing theft of electricity by connecting a wire directly with the electric line and he was caught red handed and in this respect a report of vigilance checking No. 1545/40 was prepared. In accordance with the instructions issued by the RSEB, the plaintiff non -petitioner was not entitled to get connection in 'one pole scheme connection' as he was found committing theft of electricity. As such the petitioner can be granted electricity connection in Nursery Scheme for which was given notice No. 288 on 22.3.95. The defendant petitioner placed memorandum of theft on record.
(3.) THE trial court vide the impugned order issued temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiff non -petitioner. The defendant petitioner preferred to appeal against the said order but the same was also missed.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.