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

2022 Supreme(Guj) 148

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI, J.
SPS Tube Industries Through Partner Sanny Prakashraj Jain – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
R/Special Civil Application No. 20059 of 2018 with Civil Application (For Joining Party) No. 1 of 2020
Decided on : 31-03-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Respondent: Mr.Hardik B. Shah, Ms. Lilu K. Bhaya, Adv

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 - State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 - Section 29 , 29(1) - Electricity Act, 2003 - Section 2(c), 56 - Disconnection of supply in default of payment - Writ-application under Article 226 of Constitution of India is filed by writ-applicant challenging action of respondent nos. 2 and 3 for not issuing No Due Certificate and not giving electric connection to writ- applicant's property at Plot on ground that erstwhile owner M/s. Vaibhav Alloys Ltd., could not pay amount in respect of electricity dues of premises – Held, position of law is well settled that subsequent purchaser is required to pay dues of erstwhile owner - If, any statutory rules govern conditions relating to sanction of a connection or supply of electricity, distributor can insist upon such fulfillment of requirements of such rules and regulations so long as such rules and regulations or terms and conditions are not arbitrary - Further, this Court has considered provisions of clause-2(j) of erstwhile Gujarat Electricity Act - Clause-4.1.11 of Supply Code, 2005 and Clause-4.30 of Supply Code, 2015 as referred above, new successor/occupier is required to clear dues of previous occupier before application of successor/occupier is processed for supply of electricity by Electricity Company - Further, if Board, at a later point of time, gets full or part of dues from previous consumer, amount shall be refunded to successor/occupier after adjusting costs including legal expenses to recover such arrears and refund shall bear no interest - In view of settled legal position and provisions of Code, prayers as prayed for by writ-applicant cannot be granted - This Court is not inclined to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article-226 of Constitution of India - Writ-application is dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

1. The present writ-application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the writ-applicant challenging the action of the respondent nos. 2 and 3 for not issuing No Due Certificate and not giving the electric connection to the writ- applicant's property at Plot No. 111, G.I.D.C. Industrial Estate, Village: Kerala, Tal.: Dholka, Dist.: Ahmedabad on the ground that erstwhile owner M/s. Vaibhav Alloys Ltd., could not pay the amount in respect of electricity dues of the premises as on 01.02.1998.

2. The brief facts germane for the adjudication of the present writ-application as stated by the writ-applicant are as under:

2.1. The writ-applicant purchased the above-referred disputed property from M/s. Hetal Steel Corporation by registered sale deed No. 4375 of 2010 dated 03.07.2010. Since the date of purchase, the writ-applicant has not used the said property, however, the writ-applicant is now wanting to use the said property and for the said use of the property, there is requirement of electricity. The writ-applicant approached the respondent authorities to get No Due Certificate. The respondent authority by letter dated 06.10.2016 stated that a Darkhast No. 25 of 2007 was pending against M/s. Vaibhav Alloys Ltd., for recovery of Rs.3,44,14,327.50 which is pending adjudication before the competent court.

2.2. It is stated that the applicant herein approached the authorities number of times and explained the situation stating the fact that the writ-applicant is required to get the benefit of the resolution of the government of Gujarat, in dustries & Mines Department, Gandhinagar vide GFC (GIC) 102003-1711 dated 07.02.2004 and resolution No. GFC (GIC) 102003-1711 dated 21.03.2005. It is not open for the respondent authorities to recover the outstanding electricity dues of the erstwhile owner of the premises from the writ-applicant.

3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the above communication dated 06.10.2016, the writ-applicant is constrained to approach this Court for the following reliefs:

    "(A). Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and or certiorari and any other appropriate writ, order or direction to declare that respondent no. 2 and 3 is not entitled to claim outstanding electricity dues of erstwhile owner of the premises from petitioner.

(B). Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and or certiorari and any other appropriate writ, order or direction to direct respondent to issue no due certificate to petitioner and start electricity supply to petitioner.

(C). Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and or certiorari and any other appropriate writ, order or direction to start electricity supply to petitioner during the pending, hearing, admission of this petition.

(D). This Hon'ble Court be pleased to grant any such other and further relief's deemed just and proper looking to the facts and circumstances of this case and in the interest of justice."

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE WRIT-APPLICANT:

4.1. Mr. Hardik B. Shah, learned counsel appearing for the writ-applicant submitted that the writ-applicant purchased the disputed property from M/s. Hetal Steel Corporation by a registered sale deed No. 4375 of 2010 on 03.07.2010. Mr. Shah, learned counsel further submitted that since the date of purchase he has not used the property, however, now writ-applicant is wanting to use the said property, for which supply of electricity is a must. The writ-applicant approached the respondent authority to get No Due Certificate from the respondent. in response to the said letter, the respondent authority by a communication dated 06.10.2016 stated that Darkhast No. 25 of 2007 against M/s. Vaibhav Alloys Ltd. for recovery of Rs.3,44,14,327.50 is pending. Mr. Shah, learned counsel further submitted that the writ-applicant is an auction purchaser and the writ-applicant will have the benefit of resolutions of Government of Gujarat, industries and Mines Department, Gandhianga

                Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                1
                2
                3
                4
                5
                6
                7
                8
                9
                10
                11
                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