9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 419X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... think that “wayleave” permission assumes any specific importance because members of the same family were found be CESC to occupy the property which seemed like a family property, and nobody came forward to object to the grant of electricity connection. In those circumstances, in my opinion, CESC Limited cannot be said to be in breach of their statutory duty. Furthermore, the first petitioner is a family company and the private respondents are members of that family. It is very usual for family companies in India to hold its assets as in a partnership business. The courts have also consistently recognised that the principles of partnership may be applied to this kind of a family corporation. Not surprisingly the private respondents have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the ground floor is in possession of one Rekha Mody the widow of Padampat Mody, representing one branch of the Modi family. Gita Devi Mody is the widow of Bhagwati Prasad Mody. She has two sons Pravin Kumar Mody and Pawan Kumar Mody representing another branch of the Mody family. The mother and sons are the fifth, sixth and seventh respondents and are admittedly in occupation of 550 sq.ft. on the first floor. Pawan applied to CESC Limited for electricity connection to the first floor of the said premises. Pravin applied for connection to the ground floor. The application forms are annexures to affidavit-in-opposition filed by CESC Limited (see pages 16 and 18A). The applications were made on 8th May, 2015. Pravin declared himself to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pation of that floor and apply for a meter. The first floor had sufficient lighting and there was no need for two meters or either of them, to light the servants quarters, pump room and out house etc. Therefore, according to the petitioners neither Pawan nor Pravin is the owner of any part of the property. They or their mother are in occupation of a part of the first floor only. They were not in occupation of the ground floor. Electricity was not required for the ground floor as it was already electrified. Therefore, the two meters were wrongfully granted to them. The sixth and seventh respondents in their affidavit-in-opposition tried to say that this property was bought by their ancestor. The Mody family now has two branches having sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be properly investigated before granting connection to the petitioner. Meters have been installed in May 2005. This writ was filed on 8th October, 2015, some 5 months later. There was significant delay in my opinion. CESC Limited says in their affidavit that at the time of the installation of the meters there was no objection from any quarter. They have also said in paragraph 6 (a) of their affidavit that the premises is a big bungalow known as Mody House . The security guard and the care taker of the building told the CESC officials that the sixth and seventh respondents belonged to the Mody family. CESC also found them to reside in this house on the ground and first floors. In such a situation, I do not think that wayleave permis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
