Law:

Section:

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908) --.-- --.-- S. 115 --.-- Civil revision --.-- Employee of WAPDA consumer of energy --.-- Audit note --.-- Demand was advanced to consumer without issuance of show-cause notice --.-- Liability for payment of amount --.-- Validity --.-- Demand based on audit note being violative but despite that petitioners/department is in consistent habit to demand same from consumers, which tendency, is not .only intolerable but also contemptuous and bulk of cases are pending in different Courts on basis of illegal demands of petitioners/department. [P. 475] A JUDGMENT Undeniably respondent/plaintiff was an ex-employee of petitioners-department, who was also consumer of energy supply and on the basis of an audit note No. 32 dated 29.07.2000 through disputed bill, he was directed to deposit an amount of Rs. 22,599/-qua consumption of 5956 units and the said demand was successfully assailed by him through institution of a declaratory suit. The petitioners-department remained fail to substantiate their claim and through impugned judgments and decrees the suit of respondent was concurrently decreed by the two Courts below, which are under attack of this civil revision. 2. Despite repeated calls no one has put in appearance on behalf of respondent in spite of his service, who is proceeded against ex parte. 3. Arguments of learned counsel for petitioners heard and record scanned. 4. Without going into deeper appreciation of available record, when it was confronted to learned counsel for petitioners that audit note is neither binding on the consumer nor he could be held responsible for the fault of department as pointed out in audit report and the demand was advanced to the consumer without…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492