1. The petitioner has taken out present petition seeking below mentioned relief and directions:
"10(B) The Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the memo dated 10.10.2008 issued by the respondent company as being illegal, perverse, unjust, improper and contrary to the facts and law and be pleased to direct the respondent company to accept the outstanding amount from the petitioner and on coming in receipt of it shall reconnect the electric supply and be further pleased to restrain the respondent company from disconnecting the electric connection at the behest of respondent no.2, without following due procedure of law."
2. Subsequently, the petitioner prayed for amendment so as to add further relief/prayer. The request was granted and accordingly para 10(B)(B) has been added vide order dated 24.10.2008. The said para 10(B)(B) reads thus:
"10(B)(B) The Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the action of changing the name, by the respondent company, in the record of company."
3. The learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that the amount as demanded vide memo dated 10.10.2008 (i.e. the memo which is impugned in present petition) has already been deposited by the petitioner and that therefore the said grievance does not survive.
4. So far as the relief prayed for in para 10(B)(B) is concerned, any relief at this stage cannot be granted in view of the fact that the dispute as to whether the petitioner is trespasser in the premises in question or not is pending before the Appellate Court in First Appeal No.2536 of 2011.
5. Mr.
Pujara, learned counsel for respondent company has submitted and stipulated that so far as the respondent electricity company is concerned, it will comply with whatever directions are passed by the Appellate Court in the First Appeal No.2536 of 2011 with reference to the electricity company. Mr. Pujara has clarified that actually the dispute is between the petitioner and respondent No.2. However, any direction which is passed with regard to electricity supply connection will be complied with by the electricity company.
6. In view of the said development, so far as the suit proceedings are concerned, it is fairly admitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that now, present petition is rendered infructuous and the dispute between the parties would be decided under the proceedings related to First Appeal No.2536 of 2011.
7. Any direction with regard to the name of the consumer and/or meter etc. cannot be passed at this stage because the Appellate Court has passed order directing the parties to maintain status quo.
8. In this view of the matter, the petition is, accordingly, disposed of. Rule is discharged. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated. No costs.
(K.M.THAKER, J.) jani Top