Punjab-Haryana High Court
M/S Kundan Mill Board And Paper ... vs Punjab State Power Corporation ... on 16 November, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:146788
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
RSA No.5609 of 2019 (O&M)
Date of Order:16.11.2023
M/s Kundan Mill Board and Paper Mills
.Appellant
Versus
Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others
..Respondents
RSA No.5613 of 2019 (O&M)
M/s Kundan Mill Board and Paper Mills
.Appellant
Versus
Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others
..Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL
Present: Mr. Alankrit Bhardwaj, Advocate
for the appellant (in both the appeals)
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J
C.M.No.15952-C-2019 in RSA-5609-2019
C.M.No.15980-C-2019 in RSA-5613-2019
1. For the reasons mentioned in these applications, which are
supported by the affidavits, the deficiency in court fee has been made good.
2. CMs stand disposed of
C.M.No.15953-54-C-2019 in RSA-5609-2019
C.M.No.15981-82-C-2019 in RSA-5613-2019
3. For the reasons mentioned in these applications, which are
supported by the affidavits, the delay of 166 & 194 days in re-filing and 101
days in filing the appeal is condoned.
4. CMs stand disposed of.
MAIN
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:146788
5. These two connected regular second appeals have been filed by
the plaintiff to assail the correctness of the judgment and decree passed by
the First Appellate Court.
6. In order to comprehend the issue involved in the present case,
the relevant facts, in brief are required to be noticed.
7. The appellant is a consumer of the electricity supplied by the
respondent-Corporation. In 1995, on the basis of audit objection, the dues
payable with respect to two different meters installed in the same premises
were clubbed and the appellant was directed to pay Rs.1,88,082/-. The
matter was referred to the Dispute Settlement Committee which has been
constituted by the respondent-Corporation. The appellant deposited
Rs.62,000/-. The Dispute Settlement Committee did not interfere with the
bill issued by the respondent-Corporation. The appellant filed writ petition
which was allowed on 19.11.2013, directing the Dispute Settlement
Committee to decide the matter afresh. Thereafter, the Dispute Settlement
Committee held that the plaintiff-firm cannot be held liable. One of the
grievance of the appellant is that the amount of Rs.62,000/- has been
refunded after a long delay. Secondly the appellant claims that due to
issuance of the wrong bill, the appellant was forced to litigate, hence,
entitled to the damages.
8. The trial court partly decreed the suit, however, the first
appellate court has found that there was no malafide on the part of the
officials of the respondent-Corporation as it has not even been alleged. It
has also been found that the audit party recommended to club the due
amount of two different electric connections and therefore, the suit filed by
the plaintiff for damages cannot be decreed.
9. This court has considered the submissions of the learned
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:146788
counsel representing the appellant.
10. As already noticed, the first issue is with regard to claim of
interest. The amount has already been refunded. The High Court while
quashing the order did not award any interest. The Dispute Settlement
Committee also did not award any interest. In such circumstances, it would
not be appropriate to encourage the subsequent round of litigation to claim
interest.
11 The appellant has failed to lead evidence to prove that any
damages were suffered on account of previous round of litigation except
deposit of Rs.62,000/-.
12 Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, this court does not find it
appropriate to interfere with the judgment and decree passed by the First
Appellate Court.
13 Dismissed.
14. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also
disposed of.
November 16, 2023 (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
nt JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned :YES/NO
Whether reportable :YES/NO
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:146788
3 of 3
