1. This is an appeal preferred on behalf of Mir Nabi Bakhsh Khan Khosa (appellant) under section 96, C.P.C. Against order, dated 6-3-1997 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Dera Allahyar whereby the suit for declaration and permanent injunction filed by appellant has been dismissed.
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants received electrict bills for his house and Otak against electricity connection installed in his house and Otak with meter No,8143-023830- R and 8143-023980-R in sum of Rs.3,82,489 and Rs.5,30,896 respectively payable by 30th November, 1996. The appellant protested to respondents Nos.3 to 6 and demanded correction of bills who assured that necessary correction would be made and the electricity would not be discontinued but they failed to honour their commitment and consequently a suit for declaration and permanent injunction was filed which was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge Dera, Allahyar. It is pertinent to mention here that the appellant also filed another suit (17 of 1996) for declaration and permanent injunction challenging the electricity bills No,8143-023840-R amounting to Rs.2,35,885 and 8143-0-23870-R amounting to Rs.2,62,436 being illegal and not payable by the appellant. The said suit was also dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Dera Allahyar vide order, dated 6-3-1997. Both the abovementioned suits were disposed of by a common order and accordingly I also intend to dispose of both Appeals (R.F.A. 33 of 1997 and R.F.A.
2. 34 of 1997).
3. It is mainly contended by Mr. Muhammad Aslam Chishti, Advocate that the learned trial Court has not taken into consideration the provisions as contained in section 24 of Electricity Act, 1910 whereunder a notice was mandatory before the provisions as contained in section 54-C of the said Act could be pressed into service which resulted in serious miscarriage of justice and as such the impugned order is liable to be set aside. It is next contended that no notice whatsoever was served under section 24(1) and moreso, the supply was not disconnected as such the learned trial Court should have exercised its jurisdiction which was declined without any lawful justifiable excuse. It is also argued that computerized bills were never issued in the name of appellate as such he was not responsible for its payment.
3. 4.Mr. Ayaz Sawati, Advocate appeared on behalf of respondents and strenuously controverted the view-point as canvassed by Mr. Muhammad Aslam Chishti, Advocate and contended that no illegality or irregularity whatsoever has been committed by the learned trial Court and the suits were dismissed strictly in accordance with law. In order to substantiate his contention Mr. Ayaz Sawati referred the provisions as contained in section 54-C which imposes a bar of jurisdiction on Civil Courts under peculiar circumstances which according to him were available in this case. It is further contended that the amount in question should be paid by the appellant and thereafter correction may be sought by following the prescribed procedure. On the question of notice the learned counsel contended that issuance of bill can be equated to that of notice which was received by the appellant who did not allow the WAPDA Authorities to discontinue the supply being an influential person and Exh-M.N.A. Of the area. He assured that after the payment of requisite amount necessary correction would be made and in case of additional payment the surplus amount would be refunded.
5. I have carefully examined the respective contentions as adduced on behalf of appellant and for respondents in the light of relevant provisions of law and record of the case. The suits have been dismissed in view of the bar as contained in section 54-C of the Electricity Act, 1910 which is reproduced hereinbelow for ready reference:-- "54-C. Bar of jurisdiction.---(1) Where a licensee gives a notice referred to in subsection (1) of section 24 or discontinues supply of energy to a premises under the provisions of this Act, no Court shall make an order prohibiting the licensee from discontinuing supply of energy to the premises, or requiring him to restore supply of energy to such premises, and any such order made before the commencement of the Electricity (Amendment) Ordinance, 1979, shall cease to have effect: Provided that nothing contained herein shall apply to a case in which the plaintiff, applicant or appellant, within a period of thirty days of the aforesaid date or at the time of filing the suit, application, appeal, as the case may be, deposits with the Court the amount assessed against him by the licensee and all further charges of the licensee as and when they become due; and in the event of this failing to do so, any order prohibiting the licensee from discontinuing the supply of energy to the premises or requiring him to restore the supply of energy to the premises, if already made, shall cease to have effect. Where an amount has been deposited under subsection (1), the Court shall direct it to be deposited in a Scheduled Bank in the name of the licensee to the effect that in the case, the suit or appeal is decided against him, he shall repay the said amount to the plaintiff or appellant return as the Court may determine."
4. A bare reading would reveal that section 54-C contains the following ingredients:--
(a) Issuance of notice under section 24 for discontinuation of supply of energy.
(b) Such discontinuation cannot be interfered with by a Court.
(c) Before such discontinuation the plaintiff/appellant can deposit the requisite amount and determined by the licensee and in such eventuality there shall be no discontinuation and in case of failure in doing the needful any order prohibiting the licensee from discontinuating the supply of energy to the premises or its restoration if already made shall cease to have effect.
(d) Proper safeguard has been provided to consumer that additional amount shall be refunded by the licensee.
5. ' No scholarly interpretation is required to be made in view of the plain and unambiguous language as has been employed in the said section as it would not be serving any useful purpose, and in any view, it would be an academic exercise. We cannot obtain those benefits which have not been given by the Legislature under the garb of 'academic exercises' or 'scholarly interpretation'. The provisions as contained in section 54-C of the Electricity Act, 1910 are capable enough to meet all sorts of eventualities and also provide accurate safeguard to all concerned. The question of issuance of notice and latest prevalent position has also been examined. Zahooruddin, S.D.O. Dera Murad Jamali remained present and explained that in spite of their best efforts they could not succeed in serving the notices on the appellant who was not prepared to receive it. On the point of discontinuation he informed that due to naked show of force WAPDA men were not allowed to do so. The said position was also given in writing by the Executive Engineer Operation Division (E), WAPDA, Sibi which is reproduced hereinbelow for ready reference:-- "BEFORE THE: HONOURABE HIGH COURT BALOCHISTAN. DETAILED REPORT REGARDING VILLAGE HEIR DIN PERTAINS TO MIR NABI BAKHSH KHAN KHOSO.
6. ' Sub-Divisional Officer Operation Sub-Division (E), WAPDA, Dera Murad Jamali alongwith his staff has visited the village Heir Din pertains to Mr. Nabi Bakhsh Khan Khoso on 27-9-1997 for disconnection of his connection as a defaulter of Mir Nabi Bakhsh Khan Khoso premises. The villagers and his relatives are not allowing to disconnect the premises with full resistance. The detailed record of Heir Din Village was verified, from where it was revealed that 17 No private connections are exist at our record and all of them are defaulters. The Line Superintendent concerned has already deputed one of his official for delivering the electricity bills alongwith notices of disconnections on 23-9-1997. The defaulters refused to receive the notices so the official has pasted the notices on the permanent place of the residences. The list is enclosed for ready reference. Due to hindrances of disconnections on individual basis line is disconnected from II KV of new Sohbat Pur Feeder fed to Heir Din Village on 30-9-1997.
7. ' Whereas the factual detailed report. To Mir Nabi Bakhsh Khan Khoso premises treated as Otak is submitted 'separately. Further, it is added that as far as our available record is concerned, no payment has been made by him on account of electricity bills to his premises.
8. (Sd.)
9. Executive Engineer, Operation Division (E), WAPDA, Sibi." {{TABLE}} Necessary details regarding the bills in question were also furnished which run as follows:-- S.No, Name and Address. A/C No, Outstandg amount.
10. 1.
11. 3.
12. Nabi Baksh Village Heir Din Sohbatpur. 01-00239805 5,60,410 {{TABLE}} {{URDU TEXT}} ' This is a classic example of deteriorating law and order situation. It has been observed with grave concern that on the one hand there is extreme high-handedness which depicts the peculiar characteristic of 'feudalism' and on the other hand an abortive attempt is being made to get the matter prolonged by mentioning fine technicalities of law. I am conscious of the fact that 'law should lean in favour of adjudication of causes on merits but this principle cannot be allowed to be exploited by litigant by keeping the proceedings in abeyance through hide and seek measure and then to turn around when an order has been passed against him to seek reversal thereof and further prolong the proceedings". By now neither a single penny has been deposited nor discontinuation of supply allowed on the basis of influence/force and a Court of law cannot remain oblivious of the situation. The Superintending Engineer WAPDA is directed to take action in accordance with law and supply be discontinued if the requisite amount is not deposited which will be subject to adjustment. The correction of bills be got made by the appellant at his own by following the prescribed procedure. The appellant after depositing the requisite amount may approach the Court of law and in such case the provisions as contained in section 54-C of Electricity Act, 1910 will not come in his way, which provides adequate relief and safeguards to all concerned.
13. ' The upshot of the above discussion would be that the appeals being devoid of merit are dismissed.