' SH. AZMAT SAEED, J.---This civil revision is directed against the order dated 26-7-2006 whereby the appeal filed by the respondent against the order dated 3-12-2005 was accepted.
2. Brief facts leading to the filing of this revision petition are that the petitioner as a consumer of the respondent filed a suit challenging the detection bill for an amount of Rs,16,44,160. Along with the plaint an application under Order XXXIX, rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. For grant of interim injunction was also filed. The respondents entered appearance and resisted the suit as well as the grant of temporary injunction. The trial Court vide order dated 3-12-2005 granted temporary injunction subject to furnishing of bank guarantee of the disputed amount for the payment of current bill. Aggrieved the respondent filed an appeal which was accepted by the impugned order dated 26-7-2006.
3. The learned counsel for the parties have been heard and the record appended with this petition has been perused.
4. The respondent in the written statement has taken the plea that the petitioner had tampered with the sui gas meter and by using a magnet on the top of the said meter incorrect reduced reading had been shown and thereby had utilized the natural gas by not making payment thereof.
It is contended by the respondent that a raid was conducted in which the aforesaid fact came to light while, on the other hand, the case of the petitioner is that the bill in dispute has been issued without any factual basis and is merely a ploy to extract illegal gratification from the petitioner.
5. It is also a matter of record that the petitioner had earlier filed a suit in which temporary injunction had been granted in his favour subject to deposit of the disputed amount in six equal instalments. The petitioner made only a part payment.
6. The contentions of the parties can only be settled through record of evidence. The petitioner is running an industrial concern and the absence of energy caused grave inconvenience to him while, on the other hand, there are serious allegations of tampering with the meter. In the above circumstances it would be just and equitable and in accordance with law to order restoration of the gas connection of the petitioner subject to deposit of Rs,19,44,160 before the trial Court.
' The revision is allowed in the above terms.