Citation : 2010 Latest Caselaw 1365 Del
Judgement Date : 11 March, 2010
06
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 7139/2007
RAJINDER SINGH DHAMA .... Petitioner
Through Mr. Madhu Mukul Tripathi, Adv.
versus
BSES YAMUNA POWER LTD .... Respondent
Through Mr. Vikram Nandrajog, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
ORDER
% 11.03.2010
The respondent, discom has made allegations of direct theft of electricity.
The petitioner alleges that his tenant, if at all, was responsible for the direct theft
of electricity. The respondent, discom disputes the said statement and has stated
that there is no proof or material to show that the premises was let out to a
tenant, who had indulged in direct theft of electricity. It is the case of the
respondent, discom that the said averment is an afterthought.
Counsel for the petitioner relies upon the seizure memo/inspection report,
in which names of Mr. Kallu and Mr. Sanjeev Malik are mentioned. Counsel for
the respondent, discom states that Mr. Kallu was Manager of the petitioner and
this is specifically mentioned in the form of assessment of connected load,
wherein the name of the petitioner along with user Mr. Kallu and Manager have
been mentioned.
These are disputed questions of facts, which require oral evidence and cross examination of witnesses. It is stated by the counsel for the petitioner that
proceedings under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 have been initiated, in
which the petitioner is an accused. The petitioner is entitled to raise all
contentions including the contentions raised in the present writ petition before
the Special Court. Disputed questions of facts will be decided by the Special
Court.
With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
MARCH 11, 2010 NA
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!