( 1 ) THERE is a bunch of several petitions under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. There are three categories of petitioners : (i) Mixed Load H. T. consumers, (ii) Large Industrial power ( LIP, for short) consumers, and (iii) LIP consumers running induction/arc furnaces arrayed on the one side and Municipal Corporation of Delhi through the General manager (E), DESU on the other side. The controversy centers around the Tariff for the year 1991-92 as the bills under challenge relate to the period March, 1991 onwards, the tariff for 1991=92 being effective from 1. 3. 1991.

( 2 ) THOUGH the disputes raised in the main petition are several-different in different petitions but two of them are common to the petitions in the bunch and they are relating to the applicability or working mechanism of the recovery of demand charges and of the minimum consumption guarantee clause inserted in the form of a Note in the relevant clause of tariff. Several interim orders have been passed in this bunch of the petitions in exercise of powers conferred on the court by Section 41 read with Schedule II of the Arbitration Act 1940. Disconnections of electric supply to several petitioners have been restrained, the petitioners having been protected against the recovery of demand charges and/or minimum consumption guarantee charges. Mr Ashwani Kumar, learned senior advocate appearing for DESU has placed heavy and implicit reliance on the decision of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in M. C. D. vs Asian Art Printers Pvt Ltd J. T. 1994 (5) S. C. 607 in support of his submissions that while this Court may proceed to hear and dispose of the main petitions at its convenience but must vacate forthwith the interim stay orders to the extent to which they restrain the DESU from recovering the demand charges and/or minimum consumption guarantee charges or from disconnection for non payment thereof, as the accumulated arrears against the several petitioners on this singular head have run into crores of rupees. By this order,. it is proposed to dispose of this limited part of the controversy.

( 3 ) AT the very outset, let the relevant part of the Tariff be reproduced from the Tariff for the year 1991-92 supplied in the form of a booklet at the bar at the time of hearing. It reads as under: B) LARGE INDUSTRIAL POWER (LIP); a) Availability: Available as primary power to Large Industrial consumers having connected load above 100 KW including lighting load. b) Character of service. A. C. 50 cycles, 3 phase, 11 KV. c) TARIFF Demand Charges: Rs. 60. 00 per month per KVA or part thereof of the connected load or as per load or as per load in the test report, whichever is higher. Plus Energy Charges: 200 paise per unit subject to minimum payment as laid down in item (d) below and adjustment clause (xviii) above under General Conditions of Application. D)Minimum bill: The amount of the demand charges as laid down in C" under head Tariff above. NOTE: i) Lighting category load consumption under LIP cases will be included in the main HT (LIP) category load consumption itself. :. ii) Ice factories and cold storages under HT (LIP)category will be treated as other normal HT (LIP) consumers. . , E) PAYMENT: The above rates are net. In the event of the monthly bill not being paid in full within the time specified in the energy bill, a surcharge of 3% of the amount of the bill not paid, shall be levied for each 30 days successive period or part thereof until the payment is paid in full, without prejudice to the right of the undertaking to disconnect supply after the due date in the event of non-payment in accordance with the Section 24 of the Indian -Electricity Act, 1910.- F) The above tariff is based on the supply being given through a single delivery and metering point at a single voltage. Supply at other pointer at other voltage shall be separately metered and billed. G) Supply at extra high voltage of 33 KV or 66 KV may be given at the discretion o