S.SIRI JAGAN
George Joseph – Appellant
Versus
K. S. E. B. , Rep. By Its Secretary Vaidhythi Bhavan – Respondent
The issues involved in these original petitions are identical and therefore, these original petitions are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment. O.P.Nos.26123 and 27988 of 1999 are filed by the same petitioner challenging demands for penal and additional electricity charges in respect of unauthorized load and incorrect meter for different periods and O.P.No.29518/1999 is filed by another petitioner challenging similar demand. Since the questions of law involved are the same in all the three writ petitions, I shall first decide those questions of law in O.P.Nos.26123 and 27988 of 1999 and then apply the same to the fact situation in O.P.No.29518 of 1999. O.P.Nos.26123 and 27988/1999:
2. Thepetitioner is engaged in the business of running a freezing plant in the name and style of "Deep sea Products". The plant has an electricity connection with a power meter and a light meter, for a total power allocation of 72 KW. On 6.1999, the Anti-Power Theft Squad of the 1st respondent Electricity Board, inspected the electrical installation of the petitioner and prepared Ext.P1 mahazar, which was got signed by an operator of the petitioner, in which, it was recorded t
Nirmala Metal Industries v. K.S.E.B. [2006 (3) KLT 465].
Hyderabad Vanaspathy Ltd. V A.P. State Electricity Board and others
Sub Divisional Officer (P) UHBVNL v. Dharampal
Bombay Electricity Supply & Transport Undertaking v. Laffans (India) (P) Ltd. and another
State of Karnataka v. Rameswara Rice Mills (AIR 1987 SC 1359).
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.