SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.K. DAS, J.L. KAPUR, A.K. SARKAR, M. HIDAYATULLAH AND RAGHUBAR DAYAL, JJ.
Mysore State Electricity Board (In all Appeals), Appellants
Versus
Bangalore Woollen, Cotton and Silk Mills Ltd. and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeals Nos. 629 to 632 of 1961.
15th November, 1962
Advocates appeared
Mr. M. C. Setalvad, Attorney General for India (M/s. T. Rangaswami Ayyangar, B.R.L. Iyengar and P. D. Menon, Advocates, with him), for Appellants (In all the Appeals); Mr. A.V. Viswanatha Sastri, Senior Advocate (M/s D.N. Mukherjee and B.N. Ghosh, Advocates, with him), for Respondent No. 1 (In Civil Appeal No. 629 of 1961); Mr. N.C. Chatterjee, Senior Advocate, (M/s. V.L. Narasimhamoorthy and S.S. Shukla, Advocates, with him), for Respondent No. 1 (In Civil Appeal No. 630 of 1961); M/s. V.L. Narasimhamoorthy and S.S. Shukla, Advocates, for Respondent No.1 (In Civil Appeals Nos. 631 and 632 of 1961).
-as held, the reasons given for the decision are not res judicata - Mysore State v. W.C. & S. Mills, AIR 1963 SC 1128; Mata Din v. A. Narayanan, AIR 1970 SC 1953; Mathura v. Dossibai, AIR 1971 SC 2355, decision on jurisdiction does not operate as res judicata, Jai Singh v. Maman Singh, AIR 1980 SC 1201 = (1980) 3 SCC 162 = (1980) 2 SCJ 100.
Judgment
S. K. Das, J. (for himself, J.L. Kapur A.K. Sarkar and Raghubar Dayal, JJ.) : These are four appeals on a certificate of fitness granted by the High Court of Mysore under Art. 133 (1) (c) of the Constitution. The appeals have been heard together and this judgment will govern them all. The appellant is the Mysore Electricity Board, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as the Board) in all the four appeals. The respondents are four textile mills, each mill being respondent in one of the appeals. These four textile Mills are: (1) the Bangalore Woollen, Cotton and Silk Mills Ltd., Bangalore, (2) the Minerva Mills Ltd., Bangalore, (3) Sri Krishna Rajendra Mills Ltd., Mysore and (4) the Mysore Spinning and Manufacturing Co. Ltd., Bangalore.
2. The appeals raise a common question of law, viz., whether, under S. 76 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 (LIV of 1948) the respondents are entitled to call for an arbitration in respect of an alleged dispute between them and the Board relating to the revision of rates payable by them for electric energy supplied by the appellant or its predecessor. The provisions of two Acts, the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 (IX of 19l0) and the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 (LIV of 1948) have to be considered in these appeals, and it will be convenient to cite the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 as the 1910 Act and the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, as the 1948 Act.
3. We proceed first to state the facts which have led to these four appeals. The 1910 Act and the 1948 Act were extended to the State of Mysore on April 1, 1951 by the Part B States (Laws) Act, 1951 (III of 1951). But the Sections of the two Acts did not come into force in the State of Mysore all at once. Some Sections of the 1948 Act came into force at once, and some came into force on later dates. It is sufficient for our purpose to know that S. 76 of the 1948 Act came into force in Mysore on December 30, 1956; and S. 5 thereof came into force on September 30, 1957. The Board was constituted under S. 5 by a Government notification dated September 27, 1957 to come into effect from September 30, 1957. Prior to the constitution of the Board, the Government of Mysore was generating electric energy and supplying it to consumers of both high tension and low tension power. On different dates in the year 1945, written agreements were entered into between the Government of Mysore and the four textile mills for the supply of electric energy to these textile mills at the rate of 0.55 of an anna per unit of day power and 0.35 of an anna per unit of night power, subject to the payment of certain monthly minimum charges. These agreements were for a period of five years and expired on different dates in 1949-50. By an order dated March 23, 1953, the Government of Mysore revised the rates for the supply of electric energy and increased the same to 0.65 of an anna per unit of day power and 0.45 of an anna per unit of night power. Subsequently, an expert committee under the Chairmanship of Prof. M. S. Thacker, the then Director of the Institute of Science, Bangalore, was appointed to go into the question of rationalisation of the rates for power supply in the State of Mysore. On the recommendation of the Committee, the rates for the supply of electric energy were again revised with effect from April 1, 1956. This was done by means of an order dated March 1, 1956. On April 26, 1956 the four textile mills filed four writ petitions in the High court of Mysore in which they prayed that the State Government and the Board (which Board, after its constitution in 1957, was added as the second respondent to the pending writ petitions) be restrained from levying or collecting the increased rates as per the order of March 1, 1956 and that they be directed to continue to levy the same rates for the supply of electric energy as were agreed to between the parties in the agreements of 1945. Two points were urged in support of these writ petitions. One was that the State
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.