Bombay High Court
Uttam Gyanba Chavan vs Maharashtra State Electric ... on 17 February, 2022
Bench: R.D. Dhanuka, S. M. Modak
bdp
1
8-ia-4343.21.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Digitally signed
BIPIN
by BIPIN
DHARMENDER
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
DHARMENDER PRITHIANI
PRITHIANI Date:
2022.02.18
14:48:57 +0530
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4343 OF 2021
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 4931 OF 2006
Shri Uttam Gyanba Chavan ... Applicant/
Petitioner
Versus
Maharashtra State Electric
Distribution Company Ltd. and Ors. ... Respondents
******
Mr. Rajaram P. Lote a/w Mr. Avirat Gholap for the Applicant/Petitioner.
Ms. Kavita Anchan i/by M/s. M. V. Kini and Co. for the Respondent
Nos. 1 and 2-MSEDCL.
Mr. Rajan S. Pawar, AGP for the Respondent No.3.
******
CORAM: R. D. DHANUKA AND
S. M. MODAK, JJ.
DATE : 17th FEBRUARY, 2022
P.C. :-
. By this Interim Application, the applicant seeks an injunction
against the respondents from disconnecting the electric supply to the
petitioner's residential premises as stated in the title of the writ petition
and further seeks expeditious hearing of the Writ Petition No. 4931 of
2006.
2. It is the case of the applicant that pursuant to the order dated 28 th
September, 2006 in the said Writ Petition No. 4931 of 2006, the
applicant has already deposited an amount of Rs.30,000/-. The
bdp
8-ia-4343.21.doc
applicant has been also paying the current bill amount regularly
excluding arrears claimed by the respondent nos. 1 and 2. The
respondent nos.1 and 2, however have included the amount of alleged
arrears in the current bill amount and have threatened the applicant of
disconnection of the electric supply, if the applicant does not pay the
amount reflected in the electricity bill which is inclusive of arrears.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant states that his client would
continue to pay the current electricity bill charges as directed by this
Court. Statement is accepted.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 and 2 states that the
respondent nos. 1 and 2 have not issued any notice of disconnection of
the electricity supply to the residence of the applicant. She further
states that the respondent nos. 1 and 2 are not taking any coercive steps
or would not take any coercive steps, if the applicant continues to pay
the current electricity bill i.e. bill for the current month excluding the
arrears reflected in the electricity bills issued to the applicant within the
time prescribed. Statement is accepted.
5. Respondent nos. 1 and 2 shall not disconnect the electric supply
at the residence of the applicant, if the applicant continues to pay the
current bill excluding the arrears of the electricity bill within the time
prescribed. Hearing of the writ petition is expedited. Both the parties
are permitted to file brief submissions along with synopsis and the
judgments on which they propose to rely upon in support of their rival
contentions within two weeks from today.
bdp
8-ia-4343.21.doc
6. Both the parties are permitted to file compilation of documents
and to place on record the subsequent events, with copy to be served on
the other side in advance.
7. Place the Writ Petition No. 4931 of 2006 on board for directions
on 30th March, 2022 to enable this Court to fix an early date for
hearing.
8. Interim Application is disposed of in aforesaid terms.
9. Parties to act on an authenticated copy of this order.
[S. M. MODAK, J.] [R. D. DHANUKA, J.]
