Delhi High Court
Nisha Jindal vs Jheri Devi & Anr. on 10 October, 2011
Author: Hima Kohli
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 7177/2011
Decided on: 10th October, 2011
IN THE MATTER OF:
NISHA JINDAL ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Gajendra Giri, Adv.
versus
JHERI DEVI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Counsel for Respondent No.1.
Mrs. Anjali Sharma, Adv. for
Respondent No.2/BSES
CORAM
*HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may No
be allowed to see the Judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? No
3. Whether the judgment should be No
reported in the Digest?
HIMA KOHLI, J. (Oral)
1. Amended memo of parties has been filed pursuant to which
appearance is entered on behalf of respondent No.1/landlady.
2. The present petition is filed by the petitioner praying inter alia
for directions to the respondent/BSES to install a new electricity
connection in the tenanted shop bearing No.9, Plot No.39, Bhim
Enclave, Col. Bhatia Road, Vikaspuri, New Delhi. Counsel for the
petitioner states that the petitioner is a tenant of respondent No.1 in
respect of the subject shop and had been paying the rent and
electricity charges to respondent No.1, without any default, till
September 2010, whereafter the rent was being deposited by her in
the Court since respondent No.1 refused to accept the rent. It is
further stated that respondent No.1 illegally disconnected the
electricity supply of the petitioner on 14.09.2010, and since then she
has been facing a lot of hardship. It is further stated that an order
dated 01.06.2011 has been passed by the learned Additional Rent
Controller (ARC), disposing of an application filed by the petitioner for
restoration of electricity connection, whereunder respondent No.1 was
directed to restore the electricity in the tenanted premises within 15
days from the date of passing of the order or in the alternative, to give
an NOC to the petitioner for obtaining a new electricity connection but
respondent No.1 has failed to comply with both directions. As a result,
the present petition is filed by the petitioner.
3. Counsel for respondent No.1 disputes all the allegations levelled
by the petitioner in the present petition and asserts that the petitioner
is a gross defaulter, not only in respect of payment of rent, but also in
respect of the payment towards the electricity dues payable by her in
terms of the consumption recorded in a sub-meter installed at her
shop. He states that as on date, the petitioner owes a sum of
approximately `15,000/-, to respondent No.1 towards electricity dues,
which respondent No.1 has had to deposit with respondent No.2/BSES
on her own. He further states that aggrieved by the order dated
01.06.2011 passed by the learned ARC, respondent No.1 has preferred
an appeal which is listed before the Appellate Court on 18.10.2011.
He further states that the petitioner is avoiding receiving the summons
in the aforesaid appeal, which is delaying the matter and it is for the
aforesaid reasons that respondent No.1 has not complied with the
order dated 01.06.2011.
4. Counsel for the petitioner states that on behalf of the petitioner,
he is willing to accept the summons in the aforesaid appeal and he
shall ensure that the petitioner is represented before the learned
District Judge (West) on the next date of hearing, i.e., on 18.10.2011.
He also expresses the willingness of the petitioner to pay a sum of
`15,000/- to respondent No.1, without prejudice to the rights and
contentions of the petitioner in the litigation between her and
respondent No.1.
5. As far as the present petition is concerned, counsel for
respondent No.1 states that any orders that are passed in the present
petition may be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of
respondent No.1 in the aforesaid appeal as also in the eviction
proceedings initiated by her against the petitioner.
6. Having regard to the limited scope of the present petition,
wherein the petitioner seeks a new electricity connection in respect of
the subject shop, the same is disposed of on the following terms and
conditions:
i. As counsel for the petitioner has agreed to pay a sum of
`15,000/- to respondent No.1 towards the outstanding
electricity dues without prejudice to the rights and
contentions of the petitioner in the litigation pending
between the parties, it is directed that the aforesaid sum
of `15,000/- shall be handed over by the petitioner to
respondent No.1 within one week.
ii. Upon receiving the aforesaid amount of `15,000/-,
respondent No.1 shall issue a receipt in that regard which
shall also be without prejudice to the rights and
contentions of respondent No.1 in the pending litigation.
iii. The petitioner shall file an application for grant of fresh
electricity connection in respect of the shop under her
occupation, with respondent No.2 for installation of an
electricity connection in her name, alongwith all relevant
documents. The said application shall be entertained by
respondent No.2/BSES without insisting on a No Objection
Certificate from respondent No.1.
iv. In addition to other charges, the petitioner shall also
deposit three months' security deposit based on the past
consumption pattern. The said amount will be calculated
by respondent No.2 and intimated to the petitioner within
one week from the date of receiving the application from
the petitioner. Respondent No.2 shall be at liberty to ask
for an enhanced security deposit depending upon future
consumption pattern in respect of the said meter.
v. The petitioner shall pay monthly charges of electricity
consumption to respondent No.2 regularly. The security
charges shall not be adjusted against payment of current
dues. The security amount shall be refunded to the
petitioner without interest as and when the petitioner is
evicted or vacates the premises, subject matter of the writ
petition, subject to adjustment, if any, on account of
arrears.
vi. It is made clear that in case, the petitioner fails to pay
current dues, respondent No.2/BSES shall be entitled to
disconnect the electricity connection after one billing cycle.
It is further made clear that respondent No.1 shall not be
liable or responsible to pay the current electricity charges
or any other demand in respect of the new meter, which
shall be installed in the premises in the name of the
petitioner.
7. The above directions are passed without prejudice to the rights
and contentions of the petitioner and respondent No.1 in the pending
litigation and it is clarified that installation of the new electricity
connection in the shop occupied by the petitioner, shall not create any
special equities in her favour in any other litigation relating to the
subject premises.
8. Dasti to the parties.
HIMA KOHLI,J
OCTOBER 10, 2011
'anb'
