' HAFIZ ABDUR REHMAN ANSARI, J.--- Through this civil revision under section 115, C.P.C., petitioner Allah Bakhsh son of Muhammad Yar, seeks setting aside of the judgment dated 10-6-2009 passed by learned Civil Judge, Multan, whereby the suit of the petitioner has been disposed of and judgment dated 12-10-2009 of the learned Additional District Judge, Multan dismissing the appeal of the petitioner filed against the judgment of the Civil Judge dated 10-6-2009.
2. Facts in brief leading to the filing of the instant civil revision are that the petitioner filed a suit for permanent injunction, restraining the defendants-respondents from installing the electric pole in the land of the petitioner-plaintiff. Along with the plaint the petitioner also filed an application under Order XXXIX, rules 1 and 2, C.P.C., restraining the defendants-respondents from installing the electric poles on the land of the petitioner. Learned Civil Judge vide order dated 10-6-2009 disposed of the case of the petitioner by observing that the respondents Nos. 4 to 6, respectively XEN, S.D.O. And MEPCO, Mumtazabad Sub-Division, Multan, would be entitled to install new pole of electricity subject to payment of compensation to the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved by the said order of the learned Civil Judge, the petitioner preferred an appeal. Against the said order to the extent of direction of the trial Court to compensate the plaintiff-petitioner Allah Bakhsh for getting connection from his transformer, the private respondents Muhammad Bakhsh also filed an appeal.
The learned Additional District Judge, accepted the appeal of the respondents, whereas appeal of the petitioner has been dismissed vide order dated 12-10-2009.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the electricity was already being supplied properly through the electric poles already installed in the area and there was no need to install new poles; that the petitioner filed the suit seeking permanent injunction praying that the respondents namely Muhammad Bakhsh, Pir Bakhsh and Nasir Bakhsh be restrained from getting forcibly installed the electric poles in the land of the petitioner with connivance of WAPDA Officials, respondents No,4 to 6; that the respondents in their written statement controverted the contents of the plaint. Local Commission was appointed by the learned trial Court vide order dated 22-7-2008 and the Local Commission in its report observed that the suit properly is in ownership of the petitioner and he has been holding its possession and the poles in question have not yet been installed. The learned counsel contends that with mala fide intention the respondents want to spread electricity wires over the pole which was installed on the payment of demand notice by the petitioner himself who is exclusive owner of the poles and therefore the 'private respondents are not entitled to get electricity connection from the poles fixed on demand notice of the applicant- petitioner; that the petitioner is owner of 68 Kanals of land in Khewit No,60/60, Khatoni No,150/1 and respondents Nos.1 to 3 have also their land adjacent to the land of the petitioner.
' Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both the courts below committed material illegality and irregularity in dismissing the application of the petitioner for temporary injunction.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, who could not establish the basic ingredients for grant of temporary injunction, i,e, prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss. Electricity poles are not yet installed. The petitioner himself in his plaint has made the assertion that the respondents intend to install poles in his landed property which is adjacent to the property of the defendant-respondents.
5. Respondents Muhammad Bakhsh and others filed Civil Appeal No,22/12 titled Muhammad Bakhsh and others v. Allah Bakhsh on 10-7-2009 and it was argued inter alia by the learned counsel for the respondents that the finding and observation recorded by the learned trial Court while disposing of the application under Order XXXIX, rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. Vide which the respondents had been directed to compensate the plaintiff Allah Bakhsh for getting connection from his transformer are against the facts and law and ultra vires. The transformer and other appliances are property of MEPCO Authorities. Allah Bakhsh does not have any nexus with its ownership. The respondents applied for connection, survey was conducted, demand notice was, issued which had been paid and this is their fundamental right to get electricity connection and MEPCO Authorities are legally and morally bound to supply the same. Since demand notice had been paid, therefore, it has rightly been held by the learned first appellate Court that conditional order of supply of connection subject to compensation to Allah Bakhsh passed by the learned Civil Judge is against facts and law having been passed without applicability of judicial mind, and the same has rightly been set aside.
6. This is the version of Allah Bakhsh, plaintiff-petitioner that the electricity poles and transformer in front of his house were got installed on the payment made by him and he had become exclusive owner of the same therefore without his consent further supply could not be given to Muhammad Bakhsh etc., the defendants. On the other hand the version of MEPCO authorities is that wires, meters and other apparatus are belongings of the MEPCO authorities, who was authorized to use it.
In this regard para No,8 of Abridged Conditions of Supply is hereby reproduced as under:--- "Service connections---Service lines shall be laid by the Authority either directly from the grid station or from any of the Authority's distribution mains, as the Authority may decide and the consumer shall pay on demand, the entire cost of service line, service equipment, transformer and other sub-station equipment in lump sum. Notwithstanding that the cost of a part of the service line may have been paid for the consumer, the whole of the service line, together with any wires, meters and other apparatus belonging to the Authority and installed on the consumer's premises shall remain the property of the authority who shall also have the right to use it for the supply of energy to another consumers."
7. As per para No,8 mentioned above, all the installations are belongings of the MEPCO Authorities, therefore, the version of Allah Bakhsh, plaintiff/petitioner that he was exclusive owner of transformer etc., has rightly been repelled by the learned lower appellate Court by observing that the MEPCO Authorities are competent to give electricity supply from the transformer installed in front of the house of Allah Bakhsh, plaintiff and to that extent the observation recorded by the learned trial Court vide its order impugned dated, 10-6-2009 that the MEPCO Authorities should provide the electricity connection to Muhammad Bakhsh etc., subject to payment of compensation to the plaintiff-petitioner Allah Bakhsh has rightly been set aside being against the manifest of law.
8. Cumulative result of the above discussion is that both the courts below rightly observed that WAPDA/MEPCO has authority to install the poles for supply of electricity, which is the basic necessity of life nowadays, to every citizen. Secondly, the petitioner could not establish what irreparable loss would be caused to him if respondents Nos.1 to 3 install the electric poles in his land. It will not deprive him from the piece of land if electric poles are installed on his land for supply of electricity to the residents of the surrounding area nor the plaintiff/petitioner would suffer any inconvenience. He can plough and cultivate any crop in presence of the poles in the area of his land allegedly owned by the petitioner. Therefore, I am not convinced to interfere in the orders passed by the two courts below. This civil revision being meritless is dismissed in limine.