Vikram Singh v. Junior Engineer And ORS

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision:- 12.03.2015 Vikram Singh ...Appellant

Versus

Junior Engineer and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present:- Mr. Vikas Lochhab, Advocate, for the appellant RITU BAHRI J.

C.M. No. 438-C of 2015 For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 247 days in filing the present appeal is condoned. The application stands disposed of accordingly. C.M. No. 437-C of 2015 For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 634 days in re-filing the present appeal is condoned.

The application stands disposed of accordingly. Main case This regular second appeal is against the judgment and decree dated 09.02.2012 passed by learned District Judge, Sonepat whereby the judgment and decree dated 01.09.2010 passed by the learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Sonepat vide which the suit of the plaintiffappellant (herein after to be referred as 'the appellant') has

-2been dismissed, was affirmed by the lower Appellate Court. The appellant filed a suit for a decree of permanent injunction in his favour restraining the defendants-respondents (herein after to be referred as 'the respondent') from erecting any electricity line through the land of the appellant, in any manner. The appellant was owner in joint possession as a co-sharer in 162(min)/138, 133, Khata No. 189 (Min), rectangle and Killa No. 88/9/1 (78), situated in the revenue estate of village Mahlana, Tehsil and District Sonepat. The respondents wants to erect a new electricity line from Point A to B to supply electricity in Khasra No. 71/5/2 and It was pleaded that that due to erection of the proposed electricity line, for the loss caused, the appellant can claim compensation from the Nigam.

The suit of the appellant was dismissed by the trial Court and on filing appeal, the same was dismissed. The Court below has made reference to a judgment passed by this Court in a case of Kanwar Singh vs. Union of India, Ministry of Power, Shram Shakti Bhawan, New Delhi and others, 2011 (4) R.C.R Civil 490 and in this case, the appellant had challenged the laying down of electricity line on the ground that proper procedure of law has not been filed by the licensee and he should be duly compensated for the use. It was held by this Court that licensee had power to lay over-head transmission lines without prior consent of the land owners.

-3In the present case, the Government proposed to set up only 33 KV line from 132 KV sub station for improvement in the existing system as well as for proper voltage and service to the consumer.

The judgments passed by both the Courts below, calls for no interference. No substantial question of law arises for adjudication by this Court.

Accordingly, R.S.A is dismissed March 12, 2015 ( RITU BAHRI ) G Arora JUDGE