- (1.) HEARD counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE petitioner in this writ application has prayed for a direction upon the respondent Electricity Board to grant electric connection to the house under her occupation of which, the petitioner claims to be in possession, pursuant to an agreement of sale entered into by her and the ex - landlord namely Sardarin Gurdeep Kaur. As it appears, a dispute has been raised by one Hiralal Vishwakarma who has also staked his claim of right, title and interest over the house in question on the basis of a sale deed purported to have been executed in his favour by Sardarin Gurdeep Kaur. The dispute is presently sub -judice in the civil court. Meanwhile, said Hiralal Vishwakarma has succeeded in obtaining electric connection to the portion of the house which is in his occupation and has allegedly wanted to obstruct similar connection to the portion of the house which is in possession of the present petitioner.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the respondent Electricity Board submits that the electric connection to the portion of the house was extended to Hiralal Vishwakarma on the basis of the sale deed and mutation receipt which he has produced in his favour whereas the petitioner did not produce any such documents at all. Learned counsel adds further that Hiralal Vishwakarma has objected to the grant of the electric connection to the portion of the house occupied by the petitioner. Learned counsel however submits that since the dispute regarding the rival claims of the parties in respect of the title over the house is still sub -judice, the respondent Board would consider the possibility of extending a temporary electric connection to the petitioner subject to the condition that the petitioner undertakes to pay the current electric charges. ;