SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(Cal) 516

High Court Of Calcutta
PRANAB KUMAR CHATTOPADHYAY
NABIN AGARWAL AND ANOTHER ETC., PETITIONERS - Appellant
Versus
C.E.S.C.LTD. - Respondent
W. P.  2563  Of  2001
Decided On : 09/30/2003

Advocates Appeared:
HIRAK MITRA, Jayak Gupta, Jayanta Mitra, R.L.Dutta, Reetobrata Mitra,

The conditions of supply framed by CESC Ltd. under Section 21(2) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, were not saved by Section 185 of the Electricity Act, 2003, and were inconsistent with the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003, and could not continue to be valid.

Headnote:

ELECTRICITY ACT - CONDITIONS OF SUPPLY - VALIDITY - ELECTRICITY ACT, 2003 - REPEAL OF INDIAN ELECTRICITY ACT, 1910 - SAVING CLAUSE - APPLICABILITY - CONDITIONS OF SUPPLY FRAMED UNDER SECTION 21(2) OF INDIAN ELECTRICITY ACT, 1910 - WHETHER SAVED BY SECTION 185 OF ELECTRICITY ACT, 2003 - HELD, NO.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, tenants of a large plot of land, challenged the disconnection of electricity supply by the respondent CESC Ltd. and prayed for restoration of the supply. The petitioners also sought a direction to CESC Ltd. to provide electricity directly to the portion of the premises under their occupation by installing a separate meter. CESC Ltd. contended that the outstanding dues of the erstwhile consumer, the owner of the premises, had to be cleared before a separate supply could be provided.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the conditions of supply framed by CESC Ltd. under Section 21(2) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, were not saved by Section 185 of the Electricity Act, 2003. The court observed that Section 185(2)(a) of the Electricity Act, 2003, which provides for the saving of certain actions taken under the repealed laws, does not include sanctions granted under Section 21(2) of the 1910 Act. The court also held that the conditions of supply were inconsistent with the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003, and could not continue to be valid.

Issues: 1. Whether the conditions of supply framed by CESC Ltd. under Section 21(2) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, were saved by Section 185 of the Electricity Act, 2003? 2. Whether the conditions of supply were consistent with the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The conditions of supply framed by CESC Ltd. under Section 21(2) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, were not saved by Section 185 of the Electricity Act, 2003. 2. The conditions of supply were inconsistent with the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003, and could not continue to be valid.

Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed in part. CESC Ltd. was directed to effect supply of electricity to the petitioner company by installing a separate meter to its industrial shed within 4 weeks from the date of communication of the order, subject to completion of necessary formalities by the said company including payment of the proportionate outstanding dues.

PRANAB KUMAR CHATTOPADHYAY, J.


( 1 ) ALL the three writ petitions bearing W. P. No. 1439 of 1999, W. P. No. 320 of 2001 and W. P. No. 2563 of 2001 have been assigned before this Court for final adjudication. All the aforesaid three writ petitions were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment as common questions of facts and law are involved.

( 2 ) THE petitioners in the writ petitions bearing W. P. No. 1439 of 1999 and W. P. No. 320 of 2001 have challenged the disconnection of supply of electricity by the respond-ents-CESC Ltd. and also prayed for a direction upon the said CESC Ltd. for restoration of the supply of electricity at the premises in question.

( 3 ) THE other writ petition bearing W. P. No. 2563 of 2001 was filed at the instance of one of the tenants known as 'ma Kali metals Private Limited' for restoration of the supply of electrical energy at the industrial shed of the said tenant at a portion of the premises in question upon payment of a sum of Rs. 1,66,382/- towards the outstanding dues determined on the basis of consumption of electricity on proportionate basis.

( 4 ) RESPONDENTS-CESC Ltd. used to supply electricity at the premises in question which is a large plot of land measuring about 22 bighas. East India Rubber Works (P) Ltd. is the owner of the said premises. In pursuance of an agreement between the said owner and CESC Ltd. , the authorities of the cesc Ltd. used to provide with High Tension Bulk Supply of electrical energy at the said premises since the maximum required monthly load of electricity at the concerned premises exceeded 50 KW. A Transformer was also installed at the said premises for stepping down the voltage for the purpose of redistribution of electrical energy according to the requirement of the tenants/occupants in the said premises.

( 5 ) M/s. East India Rubber Works (P) Ltd. is the registered consumer of electricity of the said CESC Limited. The factory shed of the owner of the premises was sub-divided into various sheds which were subsequently allotted to different tenants. The said tenants, however, subsequently formed an association under the name and style of East india Industries Complex Tenants Association. The said tenants Association filed the writ petitions being W. P. No. 1439 of 1999 and W. P. No. 320 of 2001.

( 6 ) FROM the records it appears that the sheds of the respective tenants are separately numbered and separated from each other. By a common arrangement between the owner of the premises and the tenants/ occupants, the electrical energy was provided to the tenants through separate sub-meters installed at different sheds under the occupation of the respective tenants. The landlord used to raise individual bills in respect of the tenants for consumption of electrical energy as recorded in the respective sub-meters.

( 7 ) ACCORDING to the writ petitioners, the aforesaid bills had been regularly paid by the tenants. In any event, the owner of the premises in question became liable to pay huge amount to CESC Limited towards consumption of electricity at the said premises. Due to non-payment of electricity bills, re-spondents-CESC limited disconnected supply of electricity at the said premises in the year 1990.

( 8 ) IT has been alleged by the writ petitioners that the landlord of the premises although collected money from the tenants towards the electricity bills but the same was not deposited with the CESC Limited and because of the defaults committed by the owners of the premises, respondents-CESC limited disconnected the supply of electricity at the said premises. The tenants of the said premises thereafter formed an association known as East India Industries Complex tenants Association.

( 9 ) THE said association, after its formation, started collecting money from the-ten-ants on the basis of the readings of the sub-merits installed at the various sheds and used to pay CESC Limited regularly. The said arrangement was initially workin






































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top