ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR
Civil Revision No.S-68 of 2019
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
1. For orders on CMA No.337/2019
2. For
orders on office objection at flag ‘A’
3. For
orders on CMA No.338/2019
4. For
hearing of main case
----
Mr.
Shahzado Dreho, Advocate for the applicant
----
Date of hearing: 06.05.2019
Date of order: 06.05.2019
O R D E R
ZAFAR AHMED RAJPUT, J:- The applicant had filed F.C.
Suit No.318/2015 against the respondents for Declaration, Perpetual and
Permanent Injunction to declare the act of disconnection of his sui-gas by the
respondents No.2 and 3 as against the norms of natural justice, against the
terms and conditions of the contract between the parties and also sought for
the restoration of gas meter. The suit was contested by the defendants by
filing written statement stating therein that the applicant was found using gas
for commercial purpose and therefore they removed the meter and whereafter the applicant
was sent a bill on 08.10.2015 for a sum of Rs.3,92,000/-, which applicant
failed to pay. Learned trial Court after framing issues and recording evidence
of the plaintiff dismissed the suit vide judgment and decree, dated 01.09.2018,
observing that the suit was not maintainable in terms of section 42 of the
Specific Relief Act, 1877. Against the said judgment and decree, the applicant
preferred Civil Appeal No.93/2018, which was heard and dismissed by the learned
4th Additional District Judge (Hudood), Sukkur vide judgment and
decree, dated 12.01.2019. Against that findings of the
Courts below, instant Civil Revision application has been maintained by the
applicant.
2. Heard
learned counsel for the applicant and perused the material available on record.
3. It
may be relevant to mention here that vide order, dated 19.12.2015, the
applicant was directed by the learned trial Court to pay the bill up to date, while
respondents were directed to restore the connection of the applicant but the
applicant failed to make compliance of the Court’s order. It further appears
that the applicant’s domestic connection of sui-gas was disconnected by the
respondents on the charge of using it for commercial purpose. It is case of the
applicant that the respondents’ act of disconnecting his sui-gas connection is
against the terms and conditions of the contract between the parties, however,
admittedly applicant failed to pay Rs.3,92,000/-
towards gas bill; hence suit for declaration cannot be maintained under Section
42 of the Specific Relief Act against the so called violation of the terms and
conditions of the contract by the respondents. There appears no illegality or
irregularity in the impugned judgment requiring any interference of this Court
under its revisional jurisdiction; therefore, this Civil Revision application
is dismissed in limine being devoid of legal merit along with listed
applications.
JUDGE