The petitioner has preferred this petition for appropriate writ for directing the respondent-company to reconnect the electricity supply to the petitioner and to hold that the respondent-company has no right to demand the amount as per the communication at Anenxure-E of Rs.10,37,862.
2Heard Mr Viral Shah for Mr Damani for the petitioners and Mr K.B. Pujara, learned advocate for the respondent-company. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties it appears that there is no dispute on the point that initial assessment made by the respondent-company was of Rs.10,37,862 against which the petitioner preferred the appeal and the appellate authority reduced the assessment to Rs.4,70,000/= out of which the petitioners have already paid Rs.2,50,000. The appellate committee directed the petitioners to pay the balance amount of Rs.2,20,000/=. Mr Shah for the petitioners therefore submitted that the respondent-company is not justified in demanding the amount of Rs.10,37,862, which is reduced by the appellate authority to Rs.4,70,000/=. It also appears that there is no dispute on the point that the petitioner has challenged the decision of the appellate committee by preferring Civil Suit No.1931 of 2001 and the said suit is pending in which no interim order is passed by the Civil Court either prohibiting the recovery and/or directing the respondent-company to restore the electricity supply.
3In normal circumstances when the civil suit is pending and the matter is arising from the proceedings of the civil suit or concerning to the civil suit, this Court would not exercise the power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, as the matter is pertaining to the reconnection of the electricity power and it is the case of the petitioner that fire has taken place in the factory of the petitioner and the petitioner requires reconnection of electricity supply, I find that with a view to see that the petitioner may be in a position to utilise the electricity which can be said as one of the necessities, the petition should be considered only for the purpose of directing the respondent-company to restore the electricity supply subject to the further outcome of the proceedings of Civil Suit No.1931 of 2001. There is one additional reason for entertaining the matter, because, Mr Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner, also submitted that in the suit pertaining to the electricity bill no interim applications are being entertained by the Civil Court unless expressly permitted by the Registry and he submits that the same is on account of the decision of this Court and therefore also I am inclined to consider the matter for the purpose of directing the respondent-company to restore the electricity supply on the terms and conditions, which may be ordered herein after, in view of the reasons recorded for such purpose.
4It is admitted position that the appellate committee has reduced the assessment to Rs.4,70,000/= out of which the petitioner had already paid Rs.2,50,000/= and as per the decision of the appellate committee the amount towards the same was to be paid of Rs.2,20,000/=. The respondent-electricity company has not carried the matter before the higher forum challenging the decision of the appellate committee and therefore the respondent electricity company would be bound by the decision of the appellate committee unless and until such decision is set aside or modified by higher forum known to law. However, Mr Pujara, learned counsel for the respondent-company, submitted that as the matter is pertaining to the assessment of 1999 even if this Court is of the view that the petitioner would be entitled to restoration of the electricity supply upon payment of the amount as ordered by the appellate committee, this Court may also consider the matter for directing the petitioner to pay the amount of interest at the rate of 24% per annum as per the conditions of supply then prevailing. Mr Pujara fairly submitted that now the statutory provisions provide for payment of 16% interest for defaulted amount.
5As the suit is pending, I find that it may not be required for this Court to conclude on the said aspect of payment of interest at the rate of 24% or 16% but, if the reconnection is to be ordered on payment of amount as per the decision of the appellate committee as there is a default in payment as on today the petitioner must be put to the condition to pay the amount of interest at the rate of 16% from 16.12.1999. Mr Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that even if this Court is inclined to direct the petitioner to pay the amount of interest, it should be from the date of the decision of the appellate committee i.e. from 30th March, 2001 and not from the date on which the inspection has taken place. As such, when the assessment is reduced from Rs.10,37,862 to Rs.4,70,000/= the assessment can be said as confirmed by the appellate committee. As the petitioner has already paid the amount of Rs.2,50,000, the defaulted payment can be said to be as of Rs.2,20,000 and therefore the liability to pay the interest can be said to have accrued from 16.12.1999 and therefore the contention of Mr Shah cannot be accepted at this stage for ordering the interest from 30th March, 2001.
6Considering the above, I find that the following directions shall meet the ends of justice.
(A) The respondent - electricity company shall reconnect the electricity supply to the petitioner upon the petitioner making the payment of Rs.2,20,000/= with interest at the rate of 16% from 16.12.1999 within a period of one week from the date of actual payment by the petitioner.
(B) It is made clear that the payment, which may be made by the petitioner as directed herein above shall be subject to the outcome of Civil Suit No.9931 of 2001 and it would be open to the Civil Court to independently examine the matter in accordance with law without being in any manner influenced by any of the observations made by this Court hereinabove.
The petition is disposed of in terms of the aforesaid directions. D.S. is permitted. ( Jayant Patel, J. ) *mohd