Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2005 (7) TMI 727

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd 19 1/4 cents of land in Porathusseri Village in Mukundapuram Taluk in public auction conducted under the provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act for an amount of ₹ 15,65,000/- Electricity connection was not available in the premises when it was purchased. Electricity supply was disconnected from the premises due to non-payment of electricity charges by the previous owner of the premises. Petitioner after purchasing the premises submitted an application in November, 2001 to the Board for fresh electricity connection. Petitioner was informed that the application would be entertained only if the electricity arrears due from the previous consumer is cleared. Petitioner has therefore approached this court seeking a writ of mandamus directing the Board to provide him with electricity connection stating that he is not obliged to pay the arrears due from the previous consumer. 3. Learned single judge dismissed the writ petition placing reliance on Regulations 15(e) of the Conditions of Supply of Electrical Energy holding that the liability of the previous consumer would not be wiped off even if the petitioner is an auction purchaser in a revenue sale. Petitioner took up t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... emises where there are arrears on any account due to the Board pending payment, unless the arrears including penalty, if any, are cleared in advance. (If the new owner/occupier/allottee remits the amount due from the previous consumer, the Board shall provide reconnection or new connection depending on whether the service remains disconnected/dismantled, as the case may be. The amount so remitted will be adjusted against the dues from the previous consumer. If the Board gets the full dues from the previous consumer through R.R. action or other legal proceedings the amount remitted by the new owner/occupier to whom connection has been affected shall be refunded. But the amount already remitted by him/her shall not bear any interest. As per clause (d) all dues to the Board from a consumer shall be the first charge on the assets of the consumer shall be the first charge on the assets of the consumer and all dues including penalty shall be realised as public revenue due on land. On execution of the agreement the prospective consumer would be bound by the Regulations relating to Conditions of Supply of Electrical Energy. The Agreement also stipulates that all sums found due to the Bo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... red in advance. If the new owner/occupier/allottee remits the amount due from the previous consumer, the Board shall provide reconnection or new connection depending on whether the service remains disconnected/dismantled, as the case may be. The amount so remitted will be adjusted against the dues from the previous consumer. If the Board gets the full dues from the previous consumer through R.R. action or other legal proceedings the amount remitted by the new owner/occupier to whom connection has been effected shall be refunded. 6. The word consumer has been defined in Section 2(c) of the Indian Electricity Act 1910, which reads as follows: (c) consumer means any person who is supplied with energy by a licensee or the Government or by any other person engaged in the business of supplying energy to the public under this Act or any other law for the time being in force, and includes any person whose premises are for the time being connected for the purpose of receiving energy with the works of a licence, the Government or such other person, as the case may be. Petitioner becomes a consumer within the meaning of Section 2(c) only if he is supplied with electrical energy b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ses the Board's right to recover the amount from the previous consumers as well as from the assets could be effectively defeated at the same time the Board is called upon to provide electricity to the same premises. Regulations 15(e) has a reasonable nexus with the object sought to be achieved, that is to save public property so as to subserve the general interest of the community. Once electricity is disconnected and the equipment dismantled, it is unjust to compel the Board to give electricity connection to the very same premises at the instance of a third party which will not be in public interest especially when electricity is considered as a public property. Further petitioner has also not challenged the validity or Regulation 15(d) and 15(e) in this writ petition. 8. We may in this connection refer to the decision of the apex court in M/s. Hyderabad Vanaspati Ltd. v. A.P. State Electricity Board (AIR 1998 S.C. 1715) wherein the court took the view that even in the absence of an individual contract, the terms and conditions of supply notified by the Board will be applicable to the consumer and he will be bound by them. After examining Section 79(j) of the Electricity (S .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... filed against the judgment in Ramachandran's case was later dismissed by the apex Court on 27-11-2000. The principle laid down in Ramachandran's case, was later followed by another Division Bench in K.J. Dennis v. Official Liquidator (2001 (3) KLT 75) and also by another Division Bench in Seena B. Kumar v. Asst. Executive Engineer (2003 (3) KLT 987). 10. Counsel appearing for the writ Petitioner brought to our notice an earlier Bench decision of this court in Souriyar Luka v. K.S.E. Board (1959 KLT 14) wherein the applicant was treated as a fresh applicant and not a successor in interest and directed to give electricity supply. When the Bench decided Souriyar Luka's case. Regulations relating to Conditions of Supply of Electrical Energy was not in existence just like the decision of the apex court in Isha Marble's case. Therefore the decisions in Souriyar Luka's case and Isha Marble's case are not applicable to the present case since we have to decide the present case in the light of the Regulations relating to Conditions of Supply of Electrical Energy framed by the Board. 11. We may in this connection refer to a recent decision of the apex Court in A .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates