LPA No. 1710 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA No. 1710 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 14.09.2011 Amrit Lal Gupta ...Appellant versus Pratibha Sharma and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present:- Mr. Jagjot Singh Lalli, Advocate for the appellant. *** PERMOD KOHLI, J. (Oral) This Letters Patent Appeal filed under clause X of Letters Patent, has been directed against judgment dated 29.08.2011 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No. 7764 of 2011 whereby the writ petition filed by respondent No. 1 against dis-connection of the electricity connection has been allowed and the Electricity Board has been asked to provide the electricity connection on taking appropriate indemnity as contemplated by the Regulations. Writ petitioner-Respondent No. 1 pleaded in the writ petition that she is a tenant under the present appellant (landlord), who instead of resorting to the legal recourse, managed to disconnect the electricity connection of writ petitioner-respondent No. 1 (tenant) illegally. The appellant was a party to the writ petition and he pleaded that writ petitioner-respondent No. 1 is a trespasser. It is admitted position that the LPA No. 1710 of 2011 (O&M) -2- appellant filed a civil suit for eviction of respondent No. 1. It is also indisputably established that respondent No. 1 is having possession of the premises. Considering all these factors, the learned Single Judge directed the Electricity Board to provide electricity connection. It is also pertinent to note that the appellant is a landlord and did not deposit the electricity charges amounting to ` 1,29,235/- with the sole objective of managing disconnection of the electricity of the premises where respondent No. 1 is presently residing. This fact has also been taken into consideration by the learned Single Judge. It cannot be disputed that the electricity is one of the basic amenities now a days and the landlord cannot be allowed to devise means and ways to effect the tenant by adopting such illegal methods. We do not find any merit to interfere in the order dated 29.08.2011 passed by the learned Single Judge. This appeal is patently misconceived and is dismissed with costs of ` 10,000/-, which shall be deposited in the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court, Chandigarh. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE (RITU BAHRI) JUDGE September 14, 2011 G.Arora