Order 4

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: Civ suit 360/25
NASIRAN BEGUM Vs. BSES YPL
05.06.2025
Present:- Sh. Rajiv Gupta, Ld. Counsel for plaintiff.
Sh. Bhanu Nimesh, Ld. Counsel for defendant.
1. Fresh Vakalatnama filed on behalf of defendant. The
same is taken on record.
2. Matter is pending before the mediation centre.
3. Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff has pressed for consideration of
the application u/o XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 CPC. He has submitted that
there has been a subsequent development in the case. Specifically,
a notice dated 25.05.2025 u/s 56 (1) of the Electricity Act, 2003
has been issued to plaintiff, proposing disconnection of electricity
supply. The said notice demands payment of Rs. 1,05,242.14/-
within 15 days. He further submits that this amount includes
arrears of Rs. 92,541.33/- as reflected in the bill dated 07.04.2025,
which is the subject matter of dispute in the present suit. He states
that the plaintiff is willing to pay the outstanding amount,
excluding the disputed arrears included in the aforementioned bill.
4. Ld. Counsel for the defendant has sought time for filing a
detailed written statement setting out the relevant facts. He,
however, submitted that- an earlier electricity connection
sanctioned in the name of the plaintiff was temporarily
disconnected in 2023. Upon payment of dues related to the
connection, supply was restored. However, the plaintiff failed to
clear the dues thereafter, and consequently, the connection was
permanently disconnected in December, 2024. The counsel for the
Cont..
-- 1 of 3 --
-2-
defendant submits that arrears from the earlier connection were
transferred to the present CA no. 100741059, concerned in the
present case.
5. In rejoinder, the plaintiff’s counsel has submitted that the
earlier electricity connection was not temporarily but permanently
disconnected in 2023. Therefore, he argues, there is no basis of
transferring those arrears to the live connection (CA no.
100741059), concerned in the present case. He contends that this is
a disputed question of fact and, in the interim, the defendant
should be restrained from acting on the notice dated 25.05.2025
and from disconnecting electricity supply.
6. I have heard the counsels for the parties at length. It is noted
that the written statement has yet not been filed and the matter
remains pending before the mediation centre. The plaintiff asserts
that the earlier meter was permanently disconnected, whereas the
defendant maintains it was temporarily disconnected, restored
upon payment and later permanently disconnected for non
payment of dues, in December, 2024. The defendant further claims
that the dues from the old meter were transferred to the live
connection involved in this case.
7. These issues are disputed and can only be determined
during trial after evidence is led by the parties. The fact remains
that the plaintiff is presently in possession of the premises where
the live connection is installed. Furthermore, the plaintiff has
expressed willingness to pay all dues except for the disputed
arrears. Considering the overall conspectus and the circumstances,
Cont..
-- 2 of 3 --
-3-
the defendant is hereby restrained from disconnecting the
electricity supply to CA no. 100741059 till the NDOH. The
plaintiff is futher directed to clear all the dues except the disputed
arrears.
8. List the matter for settlement (if any)/arguments on the
application u/o XXXXI Rule 1 & 2 CPC on 29.07.2025.
(AYUSH SHARMA)
CIVIL JUDGE/EAST
KKD COURTS/05.06.2025
-- 3 of 3 --