ORDER :- The question that falls for consideration is whether occupier of a builsing is obliged to clear arrears of electricity charges due from the previous occupier in order to get electric connection to his premises.

2. The building in question is situated in 18 cents 500 sq. links of land in survey No. 411/1A, 28/11B etc. of Mavelikkara Village, Proverty originally belonged to one S.S. Unni who bor-rowed loan from the Kerala Financial Corporation for setting up an industry under the name and style 'Priya Cattle Feed'. In order to secure the loan he created an equitable mortgage of the pro-perty by deposit of title deed. Loan was not re-paid and K.F.C. took possession of the property and sold in a public auction.

3. Petitioner purchased the said property in public auction for an amount of Rs. 3,38,000/-. By the time electric connection was already disconnected by the Board for non-payment of electricity charges. Petitioner wanted to set up as S.S.I. unit under the name and style "M/s. Arjun Associations" in the said property. He applied for electric connection. Ext. P 3 is an application to that effect. Application was rejected by the Board stating that electric connection would be given to petitioner only if he clears the arrears of the previous consumer Nos. 6556 and 6359. Petitioner is aggrieved by the said order and has approached this Court.

4. The main contention raised by counsel for petitioner is that since petitioner being an auction purchaser and owner of the property, Board has no legal right to insist payment of the arrears due from previous occupants. It is his further case, agreements entered into by the Board with the previous consumers under provisions of Conditions of Supply of Eletrical Energy are not binding on him. If at all there is any arrears Board can recover arrears from those consumers rather than from the petitioner.

5. In order to establish his case he relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in Isha Marbles v. Bihar State Electricity Board, (1995) 2 SCC 648. It was contended in an identical situation Supreme Court has took the view that Electricity Board has no egal right to collect the amount from auctionj purchaser since there was no charge over the property. It was also pointed out by petitioner that the Supreme Court has categorically held, the Board cannot seek the enforcement of contractual liability against the third party.

6. Counsel for the Board submitted that Supreme Court decision is inapplicable to the facts of this case. According to the counsel, petitioner is bound by the provisions of the Conditions of Supply of Electrical Energy and consequently Board has got the legal right to receiver the amount the petitioner if he intends to get connection to the premises. He also submitted that the Board can later proceed against the previous consumer and if the amount is recovered it would be adjusted towards dues of the petitioner or effect refund.

7. Regulations relating to Conditions of Supply of Electrical Energy was issued by the Board in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 79(j) of the Electricity Supply Act. It lays down elaborate procedure for applying for electricity connection. In this connection it is profitable to refer to Regulation 15(e) of the Conditions of Supply of Electrical Energy, which is extracted below :

"Reconnection or new connection shall not be given into any premises where there are arrears on any account due to the Board pending payment, unless the arrears including penalty, if any, are cleared in advance. If the new owner/occupier/allottee remits the amount due from the previous consumer, the Board shall provide reconnection or a new connection depending an whether the service remains disconnected/dismantled, as the case may be. The amount so remitted will be adjusted against the dues from the previous consumer. If the Board gets the full dues from the previous consumer through R.R. action or other legal proceedings the amount remitted by the new owner/

Click Here to Read the rest of this document