Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.M. MANOJ, J
Ajith Thacholi, S/o. T.K. Balakrishnan – Appellant
Versus
Kerala State Electricity Board – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
The writ petition is preferred challenging Exts.P5, P6, P6(a), Ext.P9 and P10.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the proprietor of ‘Campus International’, an establishment extending consultancy services in the education sector. The electricity connection to the premises in question, taken on lease by the petitioner, stands in the name of the additional 3rd respondent.
3. On the basis of local inspection conducted on 23.08.2006, the 2nd respondent issued a provisional bill demanding an amount of Rs.3150/- as a penalty for unauthorised use of electricity. It is further stated that if there is any objection against the provisional bill, that can be raised before the appropriate authority. However, without raising any objection, the petitioner remitted the amount, as evidenced by Ext.P3, wherein it is specifically stated as a full settlement. Thereafter, for more than six years, the petitioner continued to remit the bi-monthly charges without giving room for any further complaint.
4. Moreover, it is contended by the petitioner that if any Unauthorised Additional Load is found, it is the duty of the Board to raise demand and act in accordance with the provisions unde
Once an assessed amount is paid under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003, no further liability can be imposed, especially if the regulatory procedures were not followed.
Procedures for assessing unauthorized electricity use can rely solely on record inspections without necessitating physical site reviews, as per Section 126 of the Electricity Act.
Electricity - On a reading of Section 126 of the Act, 2003 and Regulation 27A, it is clear that a clear cut procedure is prescribed for dealing with unauthorised load, and merely because the Billing ....
The court held that excess connected load constitutes unauthorised use of electricity, but the Appellate Authority cannot enhance demands without a challenge from the original authority and notifying....
The court established that the burden of proof lies on the consumer to demonstrate the actual period of unauthorized electricity use to challenge assessments under Section 126(5).
Electricity usage must align with sanctioned load; unauthorized use attracts penalties under the Electricity Act.
The court upheld the statutory requirement for the payment of assessed amounts and interest as per the Electricity Act, rejecting claims of improper assessment.
The Electricity Appellate Authority acted within its jurisdiction in reassessing the duration of unauthorized load as per statutory requirements.
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
