IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2008 / 12TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 23847 of 2004(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ 1. SHAMSUDEEN, S/O. ABDULKHADAR, `ALJOVF' HOUSE, VADAKKEVILA, KOLLAM. 2. NAVASUDEEN, S/O. ABDULKHADAR, THODIYIL VEEDU, VADAKKEVILA, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER 1ST PETITIONER SHAMSUDEEN. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL SMT.MEREENA JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDHUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL MAJOR SECTION, PALLIMUKKU, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.A.SUDHI VASUDEVAN, SC, KSEB FOR R1 TO 3 SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB FOR R1 TO 3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No.23847/2004-L A P P E N D I X PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.4318/93 OF ERAVIPURAM SUB REGISTRY IN FAVOUR OF THE 1ST PETITIONER. EXT.P1(a) THE TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.4693/98 OF ERAVIPURAM SUB REGISTRY IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT PAID BY THE 1ST PETITIONER FOR THE PERIOD 2004-05 EXT.P2(a) THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT PAID BY THE 2ND PETITIONER FOR THE PERIOD 2004-05 EXT.P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF PROPERTY TAX PAID BY THE PETITIONERS TO THE CORPORATION EXT.P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT LETTER NO.R1/E2/2620/04/L.DIS.DATED 26/07/04, ISSUED BY THE KOLLAM CORPORATION. \\TRUE COPY// P.A.to Judge K.M.JOSEPH, J. --------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.23847 of 2004-L & I.A.No.12461/2004 --------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of June 2008 J U D G M E N T I heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. The question which is raised in this writ petition has been answered against the petitioners by this Court. {See decision in Purushothaman v. K.S.E.B. [2007 (2) KLT 827]}. About this aspect there was no dispute among the parties. The petitioners have already been given connection but subject to further orders from this Court in regard to arrears, if any, payable towards payment of arrears defaulted by the predecessors of petitioners. 3. The inter locutory application filed for impleading the additional fourth respondent is closed as unnecessary. But I feel that some time can be granted to the petitioners to pay off the amount. 4. Petitioners can be granted six months instalment facility. Respondent No.3 will intimate the second petitioner the amount due, on the basis that the petitioners will have to pay the amount due with surcharge in six equal monthly instalments. This shall be done within 10 days from the date of production of the copy of this judgment. The first instalment shall be payable on or before 02/07/2008. Further instalments shall be payable on or W.P.(C).No.23847/2004-L -: 2 :- before the first working day of succeeding months. If the petitioners pay the instalments without default, the proceedings against them will not be enforced. If, however, the petitioners commit default in paying anyone of the instalment, it will be open to the respondents to proceed against the petitioners in accordance with law for recovery of the amount payable in connection with the grant of connection. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) ms