KARAMAT NAZIR BHANDARI, J.~ Petitioner a consumer of electricity, calls in question the validity of the notice (Annexure 'C') calling upon the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.3,64,478/-, failing which action under Section 81 of the Land Revenue Act, 1967, will be taken, It is stated that for the same amount respondent- WAPDA. Has filed a suit, which is pending adjudication alongwith counter suit of .The petitioner. The argument is that untill the dispute is determined by the Civil Court, the demanded amount cannot be said to be "due" within the meaning of Section 81 of the Land Revenue Act, 1967.
It is stated that penal provisions of Land Revenue Act were applicable to ascertained and undisputed amount and not the amounts which are pending determination.
2. Learned counsel appearing for WAPDA has not disputed the legality of the above submissions It is, however, Contended that the petitioner is avoiding payment of this amount since 1995. It has also been submitted that with a view to avoid the payment of the amount, the petitioner is disposing of the factory.
3. Since the -suits are pending, respondents can move the Civil 'Court for appropriate orders, so as to preserve the assets for execution of the decree, Which may be passed in their favour. The fact remains that untill the decision of the controversy by the Civil Court the amount cannot be said to be "due" within the meaning of Section 81 of the Land Revenue Act, 1967.
4. In the circumstances, this petition is allowed and the impugned notice is hereby declared to have been issued without lawful authority and consequently of no legal effect. No order as to costs.