* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 12441/2009
Decided on: 12.03.2012
IN THE MATTER OF
ASHA GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. H.L. Verma, Advocate
versus
BSES RAJDHANI POWER LTD. ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Deepak Pathak, Advocate
CORAM
HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
HIMA KOHLI, J. (ORAL)
1. The present petition is filed by the petitioner praying inter alia for quashing of the speaking order dated 02.09.2009 passed by the respondent/BRPL and the consequent bill with the due date 22.09.2009.
2. Notice was issued on the present petition on 15.10.2009, on which date, an interim order was passed directing the petitioner to deposit a sum of `2 lacs in four equated monthly installments, and subject to the said deposit, the remaining demand raised by the respondent/BRPL had been stayed. An intra court appeal had been preferred by the petitioner against the aforesaid interim order, registered as LPA No.577/2009, wherein vide order dated 10.11.2009, the Division Bench had modified the interim order dated 15.10.2009 and had directed that there would be an unconditional W.P.(C) 12441/2009 Page 1 of 3 stay of the demand raised by the respondent/BRPL against the petitioner in respect of the impugned bill during the pendency of the present petition.
3. A perusal of the order sheets shows that thereafter the parties had approached the Continuous Lok Adalat for exploring the possibility of arriving at a negotiated settlement, which proceedings went on till 24.08.2011, when the matter was returned unsettled on the ground that the parties could not arrive at a settlement.
4. Pleadings are complete in the matter. Counsel for the respondent/BRPL states that a criminal complaint was filed against the petitioner before the Special Electricity Court, registered as CC No.641/2010, wherein a summoning order has been passed. However, due to the pendency of the present petition and in view of the order passed by the Division Bench, the Special Electricity Court is stated to have adjourned the matter sine die vide order dated 09.01.2012. He states that as disputed questions of facts have been raised in the present petition, it would be appropriate if the parties are relegated to the aforesaid proceedings, for them to place on record the oral and documentary evidence in their possession for proper adjudication.
5. Counsel for the petitioner states that while he has no objection to the aforesaid proposal, the petitioner be permitted to take all the pleas that may be available to her, both in law and on facts before the Special W.P.(C) 12441/2009 Page 2 of 3 Electricity Court.
6. The present petition is disposed of with liberty granted to the respondent/BRPL to approach the Special Electricity Court for revival of the criminal complaint filed by it against the petitioner, whereafter summons shall be issued to the petitioner in accordance with law. As and when the petitioner enters appearance before the Special Electricity Court, she shall be entitled to take all the pleas that may be available to her, both in law and on facts. It is further directed that the order dated 10.11.2009 passed in LPA No.577/2009 shall continue to operate in favour of the petitioner, till the complaint filed by the respondent/BRPL is finally disposed of by the Special Electricity Court.
A copy of this order be given dasti to the counsel for the respondent/BRPL.
(HIMA KOHLI)
MARCH 12, 2012 JUDGE
rkb
W.P.(C) 12441/2009 Page 3 of 3