IMPORTANT POINTS
Section 56(2) bars disconnection after two years of ‘first due’ but not issuing supplementary bill and/or demand.
In case supplementary demand is raised on discovering a mistake, then the limitation would start from the date of such discovery.

JUDGMENT

Indu Malhotra, J.

Delay condoned. Leave granted.

(a) The issues which have arisen for consideration in the present Civil Appeal are : -

(b) What is the meaning to be ascribed to the term "first due" in Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003?

(c) In the case of a wrong billing tariff having been applied on account of a mistake, when would the amount become "first due"?

(d) Whether recourse to disconnection of electricity supply may be taken by the licensee company after the lapse of two years in case of a mistake?

1. The factual matrix in which the aforesaid issues have arisen for our consideration is : -

1.1 In the present case, for the period July, 2009 to September, 2011, the Respondent along with other consumers were billed by the licensee company (the Appellant herein) under Tariff Code 4400 @Rs.l.65 per unit.

1.2 During the course of a regular audit being conducted by the Internal Audit Party, it was discovered that in 52 cases, including that of the Respondent, the bills were raised under the wrong Tariff Code 4400, instead of Tariff Code 9400, under which the prescribed tariff rate was Rs.2.10p. per unit.

1.3 On 18.03.2014, the licensee company issued a show cause notice to various consumers, including the Respondent, raising an additional demand for consumption of electricity for the past period from July, 2009 to September, 2011. It was mentioned in the notice that the amount was payable in view of the internal audit conducted by the department.

1.4 On 25.05.2015, the licensee company raised a bill demanding payment of Rs. 29,604/- from the Respondent under Tariff Code 9400 for the period July, 2009 to September, 2011.

1.5 Aggrieved by the said demand, the Respondent filed a Consumer Complaint before the District Consumer Forum, Ajmer.

The District Forum vide Order dated 21.06.2016, allowed the Consumer Complaint, and held that the additional demand was time-barred.

1.6 Thereafter, the State Commission vide Order dated 30.05.2017, allowed the Appeal of the licensee company, and set aside the Order dated 21.06.2016 passed by the District Forum.

1.7 In the Revision Petition filed by the Respondent before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, the Order passed by the State Commission was set aside. The National Commission held that the additional demand was barred by limitation under Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003 ("the Act").

1.8 The licensee company has filed the present Civil Appeals before this Court to challenge the final judgment dated 28.05.2018 passed by the National Commission.

1.9 This Court vide Order dated 05.03.2019 appointed Mr. Devashish Bharuka as Amicus Curiae to assist this Court on the issues raised for determination.

It was further directed that the Appellant -Corporation would not be entitled to recover the additional demand from the Respondent in this case, and only the questions of law would be determined.

2. We have heard the learned Counsel on behalf of the Appellant - Corporation and the learned Amicus Curiae.

3. Mr. Puneet Jain represented the licensee company, and submitted that the power to disconnect electricity supply under Section 56(1) of the Act may be exercised by the licensee company when a consumer neglects to pay the electricity charges, or any other sums due and payable by him. The neglect to pay the "sum due" by a consumer, necessarily requires that there should be a "demand" of the sum due from the consumer, which he is required to pay within the period stipulated. If the demand is not paid within the stipulated time, then the power of disconnection under Section 56(1) may be resorted to.

3.1 It was further submitted that when a bill or demand is raised, which is disputed by the consumer, he may raise the dispute before the Authorities as provided by Section 42(5) or 42(6) of the Act, or avail such other remedies as may be available in law, such as a suit for declaration and injunction; consumer dispute before the consumer fora; arbitration if provided by