JUDGMENT - Dr. B.P. SARAF, J.:---By this writ petition, the petitioner Khurshed Sorabji Cooper has challenged the supplementary bill dated 1 August, 1990 and the notice of disconnection dated 19 November, 1990 issued by the respondent-The Bombay Electric Supply Transport Undertaking (BEST) there is no controversy about the material facts of the case. The petitioner is supplied electrical energy by the respondent. A meter has been installed by the respondent for ascertaining the amount of energy supplied to the petitioner. Bills were raised from time to time by the respondent for the electrical energy supplied to the petitioner on the basis of the register of the said meter, which were duly paid by the petitioner. On 30 March, 1989, the said meter was replaced by the respondent as its functioning was found by it to be defective. A letter was addressed to the petitioner by the Superintendent Consumers Senior of the respondent saying that due to some defect the old meter could not register the proper quantum of electrical energy passing through it during the period 24 August, 1985 to 30 March, 1989. A supplementary bill for a sum of Rs. 26,819.13 being the extra claim for the period

Click Here to Read the rest of this document