RSA No.238 of 2007(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No.238 of 2007(O&M) Date of decision: 19.2.2009 Ajay Jain ......Appellant Versus The S.DO., HVPN, Sub Division Kundli and others ......Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. Anil Rathee, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Gaurav Mohunta Advocate for the respondents. * * * Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. As per the averments made in the plaint, the plaintiff who was consumer of the defendants vide connection No.MS-93R was found indulging in theft of electricity energy on account of duplicate seals on the meter of defendants. The defendants imposed penalty of Rs.5,92,338/- upon him and raised the demand. The appellant filed a suit against the defendant-respondents seeking a decree of permanent injunction restraining them permanently from recovering the amount of penalty of Rs.5,92,338/- from him and also restraining the respondents from disconnecting the electricity connection and also sought restoration of electricity connection in his premises. Hence, the suit. Upon notice, defendants appeared and filed written statement taking various preliminary objections. On merits, it was stated that the version of the plaintiff is concocted. It was stated that the checking was conducted by the vigilance staff and the appellant was found indulging in RSA No.238 of 2007(O&M) 2 theft of electricity. It was further stated that notice was given and a penalty of Rs.5,92,338/- was imposed in accordance with law. After perusing the evidence on record and hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the suit of the plaintiff was dismissed by the trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 29.4.2006. Feeling aggrieved therefrom, the plaintiff filed an appeal before the Lower Appellate Court challenging the same. The only point agitated before the Lower Appellate Court by the appellant was that before imposing penalty principles of natural justice were not complied with as notice of assessment of penalty was not given. The Lower Appellate Court vide impugned judgment and decree dated 5.12.2006 found that the appellant was not given any notice before assessment of the amount of penalty and reversed the findings of the trial Court on material issue and held that the defendants are not entitled to recover Rs.5,92,338/- from the plaintiff, further observing that the defendants can assess the penalty afresh after giving 7 days' notice to the plaintiff as required under the agreement Ex.D1 and as a result thereof the appeal of the appellant was accepted and the defendants were restrained from recovering the penalty of Rs.5,92,338/- from the plaintiff on the basis of notice of assessment dated 22.4.1999. However, the defendants were at liberty to make assessment of the penalty afresh after giving 7 days' notice to the plaintiff as required. Still feeling aggrieved from the aforesaid judgment and decree of the Lower Appellate Court, the plaintiff has filed the instant appeal. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant. Since the findings on the material issues have been reversed in favour of the appellant, I find no ground to interfere in this appeal filed by the plaintiff. RSA No.238 of 2007(O&M) 3 No substantial question of law arises. Dismissed. February 19, 2009 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE