IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No. 1805 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 25th July, 2011 P.V.M. Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. … Appellant Versus Punjab State Electricity Board and another … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Puneet Jindal, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. B.R. Bansal, Advocate for the respondents. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Mr. Jindal has very fairly stated that the civil suit instituted by the appellant-plaintiff was not maintainable and the alternative efficacious remedy available with the appellant-plaintiff was to approach the Zonal Dispute Settlement Committee (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Committee’). Learned counsel has further stated that in the grounds of appeal, an alternative prayer has been made that the appellant-plaintiff be permitted to withdraw the plaint under Order 7 Rule 10 CPC to pursue his remedy before the Committee/Forum constituted under Section 42(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003. Counsel for the respondents has stated that in fact this was a preliminary objection he intended to raise, and therefore, he has no objection in case the appellant-plaintiff is permitted to withdraw the suit to approach the Committee. Learned counsel has submitted that in case Regular Second Appeal No.1805 of 2010 (O&M) the appellant-plaintiff approaches the Committee within one month from today, no objection qua limitation shall be raised. In view of the broad consensus arrived at between counsel for the parties, appellant-plaintiff is permitted to withdraw the plaint with a liberty to approach the Zonal Dispute Settlement Committee within one month from today. If he does so, no objection qua delay be raised. Dismissed as withdrawn. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE July 25, 2011 rps 2