RSA 3093 of 2009 (O&M) 1 In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. Decided on January 19,2010. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and another -- Appellants vs. M/S. Satpal and Sons, Rice and General Mills, Bazida Road, Karnal and others --Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.Gaurav Mohunta Advocate,Advocate,for the appellants Mr.V.K.Jindal,Advocate,for the respondents Rakesh Kumar Jain, (Oral) The defendants are in second appeal in a suit for declaration and consequential relief of permanent injunction. The case set up by the plaintiffs/respondents is that they are having electricity connection bearing old account No.MS-75 and new account No. MS-10. On the basis of inspection, a notice vide memo No. CH-5/CA/CF dated 20.1.2006 was issued to the plaintiffs by the defendants to deposit Rs.14,00,000/- on the allegations that the plaintiffs' firm was found committing theft of electricity by tampering of meter body seals. The said notice is challenged in the present suit which has been decreed by both the Courts below. While dismissing the appeal filed by the defendants/appellants, RSA 3093 of 2009 (O&M) 2 the learned first Appellate Court recorded following opinion:- “In view of the above submissions and a perusal of the entire trial Court record reveals that notice Ex.P-3 has been issued by the department vide which the impugned penalty was imposed upon the respondent/plaintiffs for causing abstraction of electric energy by way of illegal means and the case is based upon the checking reports Ex.D1 and Ex.D2. In both the reports, it has been specifically mentioned that the seals were genuine but tampered. It was further revealed that the accuracy of the meter installed was found to be within the limits. Meaning thereby the meter was found to be recording accurate reading. A perusal of both the reports Ex.D1 and Ex.D2 further reveals that before opening the MCB outdoor, seals and lace wiring, inner door of MCB was also found intact. When Shri Rajiv Anand SDO, Sub Division, UHBVN, Karnal stepped in the witness box as DW1, he has tendered his affidavit Ex.DW1 and prayed that the contents of his affidavit may be read as part of his statement. However, during his cross -examination he has admitted that the accuracy of the meter was found to be within limits. He has further admitted that no artificial mans was found at the spot but the meter terminal seals were found to be in a tampered condition. He has further deposed that the meter was not checked by the M& T Lab in his presence. Moreover, this fact has also been admitted by Shri Lal Singh Rathore, Xen, Sub Division No.1 Karnal as well as Shri S.K.Makkar, AEE Sub division, Karnal when they appeared in the witness box as DW2 and DW3 respectively. The team of the officials of the department has inspected the premises as well as the M&T Lab could not open the electric meter because of the unidirectional screws and the meter was sent to the manufacturer for verification of the RSA 3093 of 2009 (O&M) 3 external circuit. In this regard, it has been admitted by Sh. S.K.Makkar DW3 during his cross examination that without tampering the outer as well as indoor seals, it is not possible to tamper the inner portion of the meter but the same can be done with the help of the staff of the Department. The defendants have also placed on record the report of the manufacturer which is Ex.D8. Thereafter notice was served upon the plaintiffs to attend the checking, which is Ex.D7, but the defendants have failed to lead any cogent and sufficient evidence from which it can be safely gathered that any notice was served upon the plaintiffs. In the report submitted by the M& T Lab, it was observed that the meter was tampered internally in order to manipulate its working, but it cannot be presumed that the meter was opened by the plaintiffs when the same could not be opened by the checking staff or the M& T Lab. Thus, it can be well opined that the defendants have failed to establish that how and on which basis, they have observed that the plaintiffs were found extracting by way of using illegal means.” In this second appeal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/defendant has argued with lot of vehemence, but he could not make out any question of law much-less substantial for the purpose of this appeal. The defendants have failed to establish as to on what basis the plaintiffs have been found to be extracting energy by exercising illegal means. The defendants/appellants could not satisfy this Court if the meter could not be opened by the team of department because of unidirectional screws then how the plaintiffs could extract electricity by artificial means, specially when DW-3 had admitted in his cross examination that without tampering the outer as well as the indoor seals, it was not possible to tamper the inner portion of the meter. RSA 3093 of 2009 (O&M) 4 In view of the above, I do not find any reason to tinker with the finding of fact recorded by both the learned Courts below in respect of the allegations of theft which could not be proved by the defendants. Hence, the present appeal is found to be without any merit and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. January 19,2010 RR (Rakesh Kumar Jain) Judge