Back
PRATEEK JALAN
D. D. Motors – Appellant
Versus
BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Prateek Jalan, J.
1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for the following reliefs:-
(b) pass a direction to the respondent to raise the correct bill by withdrawing the penalty of LIP from the date of its levy.
(c) award the costs of present proceedings in favour of the petitioner;
(d) any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.”
2. The petitioner was running a car dealership and workshop from premises No. A-100, Phase-II, Mayapuri Industrial Area, New Delhi. It has challenged a bill issued by the respondent for electricity charges for the month of November 2004 [Annexure P-10 to the writ petition], to the extent that the bill reflects arrears of Rs.136489.20/-. The amount of Rs.1,36,489/- has been carried over f
The court emphasized the necessity of adhering to procedural safeguards in billing disputes, affirming that natural justice principles apply even in electronic billing contexts.
Electricity - Quash of Excessive electricity bill - In absence of making the petitioners known of the formula applied for working out the impugned bill, there was no occasion or opportunity for the p....
Supplementary bills can be raised for mistakes, but disconnection for non-payment after two years is prohibited under Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003.
The court reaffirmed that principles of natural justice require prior notice before taking actions that adversely affect a party's rights.
The court established that an electricity company can issue revised bills for bona fide mistakes in billing, reinforcing the consumer's obligation to pay based on accurate meter readings.
The main legal point established is the application of the multiplying factor in electricity billing and the interpretation of Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act.
The Electricity Board must refer disputes regarding defective meters to the Electrical Inspector before raising supplementary bills, as mandated by S.26(6) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910.
The court upheld that a voluntarily entered agreement for billing practices, despite subsequent legislative changes, remains binding on the parties involved unless proven otherwise.
Section 135 of 2003 Act deals with an offence of theft of electricity and penalty that can be imposed for such theft. This squarely falls within dimensions of criminal jurisprudence and mens rea is o....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
