R.S.A. No. 1612 of 2011 (O&M) [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. R.S.A. No. 1612 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: May 12, 2011 Dakshini Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. …..Appellant. Vs. Calpro Foods Private Limited …..Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr.Gaurav Mohunta, Advocate for the appellant. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) For the reasons mentioned in the application the delay in filing of the appeal is condoned. Application stands disposed of. The suit of the plaintiff- respondent for declaration that the memo dated 21.10.199 raising a demand of Rs.2,91,738/- on the basis of the checking report dated July 13,1998 has been decreed by the Courts below on the ground that the demand notice has been issued without giving an opportunity of hearing to the plaintiff- respondent as per the judgment of the R.S.A. No. 1612 of 2011 (O&M) [2] Apex Court in Canara Bank Vs. V.K. Awasthy, 2005 (3) Recent Service Judgments 156 (SC). However, the right of defendant- appellant to recover the amount after giving fair opportunity in accordance with law has been safeguarded. Counsel for the appellant has vehemently contended that the plaintiff- respondent was present at the time when checking was done on July 13, 1998 as such he is not entitled to any opportunity of hearing. He has also submitted that the demand notice Ex.P1 dated October 21, 1999 is a notice of 7 days’ requiring the plaintiff- respondent to deposit the amount in instalments. After hearing counsel for the appellant at length and going through the contents of Ex.P1, the notice dated October 21, 1999, this Court is of the considered opinion that the said notice is a demand notice giving 7 days’ time to the plaintiff- respondent to pay a sum of Rs.2,91,738/-. It cannot be termed as a show cause notice as required under Section 121 of the Electricity Act, 2003. As the interest of the defendant- appellant to recover the amount after following the due procedure of law has not been prejudiced and liberty has been given to the appellant to effect the recovery of the consumption charges, interest, penal interest, surcharge, fine etc., no ground is made out for interference in the judgments and decrees passed by the Courts below. Dismissed. May 12, 2011 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE R.S.A. No. 1612 of 2011 (O&M) [3]