Writ Petition 2481/2010 1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2481/2010 M.S.E.D.C.L.URBAN SUB DIVISION NO. 1, JALNA THROUGH ITS EXECUTIVE EGINEER Vs.DR. RAJENDRA PREMCHAND KARWA Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. DATED : 11th March, 2011. Mr. S.M. Godsay, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P.P. Darak, Advocate for respondent sole. 1. This writ petition is challenging the interim order dated 26/02/2010 passed by Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum, constituted under the provisions of the electricity Act, 2003, directing respondent to deposit Rs.2 lac (Rs. Two lac) as condition precedent for adjudicating his complaint against the present petitioner. The dispute between the petitioner and the respondent is going on since quite some time. It is common ground that the petitioner has a claim over Rs.4 lac, against the respondent in respect of the charges of electricity consumed at the hospital of the respondent. It is also common ground that the respondent is resisting this claim and rather belatedly he had gone to the above mentioned forum for getting redressal. The Writ Petition 2481/2010 2 learned forum directed him to deposit Rs.2 lac as condition precedent. The petitioner now contends that the respondent could not have approached the forum because he was not a consumer as understood through the provisions of section 2(i)(d) of the above mentioned Electricity Act, 2003. The second grievance of the petitioner is, the amount directed to be deposited is rather less. I am not inclined to disturb the impugned order for following reasons. REASONS 2 The question as to whether the respondent is a consumer, would very well be decided by the above mentioned forum. Secondly, the amount of Rs.2,00,000/- directed to be deposited, does not appear to be a meager one. It is almost 50% of the total claim. This amount has been deposited by the respondent and he has shown his bona fide. In view of this, the petition stands dismissed. The parties have no objection to direct the forum to dispose of the complaint filed by the respondent as far as possible within six months. [A.V. NIRGUDE,J.] ts k/2011/march11/wp2481.10