IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.7456/2017 (GM – KEB) BETWEEN:
KUSUMA CHANAPPA W/O KUMARAVELRAMAN, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, NO.223, 4TH CROSS, MCECHS LAYOUT, Dr. SHIVARAMKARANTH NAGAR, BANGALORE-45. ... PETITIONER [BY SRI S.B.TOTAD, ADV.] AND:
1. R.KUMARAVEL S/O M.RAMAN, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT FLAT NO.J1, 1ST FLOOR, PRASHANTHI FIELD APARTMENT, KADUGODI, POST OFFICE ROAD, BANGALORE-560 067.
2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (V), C-8, SUB-DIVISION, BESCOM, 13TH MAIN ROAD, 20TH CROSS ROAD, SHAHAKARA NAGAR, BANGALORE-94. …RESPONDENTS [BY SRI G.C.SHANMUKHA, ADV. FOR R-2; R-1 SERVED, BUT UNREPRESENTED.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO NOT TO DISCONNECT THE ELECTRICITY POWER SUPPLY TO THE RESIDENTIAL HOUSE OF THE PETITIONER.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent No.2.
Respondent No.1 is served and unrepresented.
The petitioner has sought for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to disconnect the electricity power supply to the residential house of the petitioner.
2. It transpires that M.C.No.1274/2016 was filed by the respondent No.1 for dissolution of the marriage with the petitioner which was solemnized on 24.03.2002 and in the said proceedings, an order of status-quo was passed with regard to the property in question including the electricity facility. It was the grievance of the petitioner that despite the said order passed by the Family Court a notice has been issued to the petitioner and respondent No.1, wherein both of them have been imposed with back billing charges of Rs.96,989/- and have been asked to pay compounding fee of Rs.40,000/-. The complaint filed by the petitioner before the Consumer Redressal Forum, Bengaluru City has been considered and a direction was issued to respondent No.2 to maintain status-quo of the electricity supply provided to the residential premises of the petitioner. However, the electricity supply was not restored by respondent No.2. Considering these aspects, this Court by order dated 25.04.2017 issued emergent notice and directed respondent No.2 to immediately restore the electricity supply to the residential address of the petitioner.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that respondent No.1 has withdrawn M.C.No.1274/2016 before the Family Court and the petitioner has filed O.S.No.47/2018 before the Family Court, Bengaluru seeking for the judgment and decree of perpetual injunction restraining defendant No.1, his family members, dispossessing and interfering with plaintiffs peaceful possession and enjoyment of the schedule property and for other consequential reliefs. In the said proceedings, I.A.Nos.2 to 4 were filed by the petitioner. Considering the same, an ex-parte temporary injunction has been granted to the petitioner and the same is in operation as on date.
4. It is evident that inter-se dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.1 is the cause for respondent No.2 to disconnect the electricity supply to the residential house of the petitioner. However, considering the proceedings pending before the Family Court in O.S.No.47/2018, this Court deems it proper to direct respondent No.2 to provide regular electricity supply, subject to the petitioner depositing the back billing charges and the compounding charges of Rs.1,36,989/- (Rupees One Lakh Thirty Six Thousand Nine Hundred and Eighty Nine only) before the respondent No.2 within twelve weeks from the date of the receipt of the certified copy of the order. Temporary connection of electricity supply shall not be disturbed till then. Ordered accordingly.
Writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the above.
In view of the disposal of the writ petition, interim order granted earlier stands vacated.
Sd/- JUDGE PMR