Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
DEVASHIS BARUAH
UCO Bank, Maligaon Branch – Appellant
Versus
Assam Power Distribution Company Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. discrepancy in electricity billing and consumption. (Para 2 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 2. arguments regarding meter accuracy and billing practices. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's review of evidence and legal standards. (Para 7 , 11) |
| 4. legal interpretation of section 56 of the electricity act. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 5. final decision and order regarding payment timeline. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. M. Sharma, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. B. Choudhury, the learned Standing Counsel appears on behalf of the Respondent APDCL.
3. Mr. M. Sharma, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that pursuant to the filing of the instant writ petition the affidavit-in-opposition had been filed wherein the Respondent Authorities have categorically admitted that the meter in question was healthy, and as such, the consumption of the units as have been mentioned of 61238 could not have been there. The learned counsel further submitted that even from the document enclosed as Annexure-2 to the affidavit-in-opposition, it would be seen that the units said to be consumed i.e. 61238 units is for a period of 55 months which is contrary to
The obligation to pay electricity charges arises upon issuance of a bill, which constitutes the first due, and the limitation period under Section 56(2) does not prevent supplementary demands.
The obligation to pay electricity charges arises upon issuance of the bill, which constitutes the first due amount, regardless of prior consumption, as per Section 56 of the Electricity Act, 2013.
The obligation to pay electricity charges arises upon the issuance of a bill, as clarified under Section 56 of the Electricity Act, allowing supplementary demands beyond the usual limitation period w....
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 held that a licensee can correct a bona fide mistake in billing even after the two-year limitation period for recovery of dues under Section 56(2) of The Electricity Act, 2003.
The interpretation of Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003, restricts the recovery of electricity charges for a period not more than two years preceding the date of the first demand of such cha....
The obligation to pay electricity charges arises upon the issuance of the bill, thus supplementary demands can be made regardless of billing errors, provided service is not disconnected for payment f....
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.
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
