Order

Special Leave granted in both the matters.

The respondent obtains electricity from the appellant. On 10th Decem­ber, 1992 a surprise check was made at the respondent’s place and it was found that in the potential transformer (PT) a fuse had been blown off with the result that it was not supplying any electricity from primary cable to secondary cable and, as a consequences thereof, the quantum of electricity consumed was not being correctly recorded in the meter. A notice was issued requiring the respondent to show cause as to why charges for less consumption be not charged for the period December 1991 to December 1992. In order to avoid the discon­nection of the electricity, the respondent, with the permission of the authority, installed a new PT on the respondent undertaking to pay in future for the supply given to it.

2. On 29th December 1992 respondent gave a reply to the show cause notice and inter alia raised a dispute that the PT and the meter panelling were not working pro­perly. After taking into consideration the reply,­ the Executive Engineer on 22nd January 1993 made an assess­ment of Rs. 57,77,891.38 and raised a bill. Thereupon the respondent filed a suit in the Cou