High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 09 CHH CK 0175

Suresh Kumar Tejwani vs Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board And Ors

Chhattisgarh High Court · Decided on 11 September 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (227) No. 1006 Of 2015

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 239 words

Sanjay K. Agrawal, J

1.

By the impugned order dated 26.08.2015 the trial Court has rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Section 152 of the C.P.C. against

which this writ petition has been preferred.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is unsustainable and bad in law and is liable to be set aside.

3.

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents would support the order impugned.

4.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order.

5.

The trial Court while granting the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of C.P.C. filed by the petitioner directed for deposit of amount by order

dated 04.01.2000 every month regarding the electricity charges which has been deposited by the petitioner and the suit was decreed on 30.06.2006 but

there was no order with regard to deposited amount.

6.

Be that as it may, since there is no order regarding the amount deposited by the petitioner in compliance of the order dated 04.01.2000, the trial

Court is directed to consider and decide the petitioner's application afresh after hearing the parties within two months from the date of receipt of copy

of this order and to pass order with regard to amount deposited by the petitioner in compliance of the order dated 04.01.2000.

7.

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s).