Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, P.M.MANOJ
M.A. Mahaboob, Managing Partner, Hycount Plastics & Chemicals – Appellant
Versus
Kerala State Electricity Board Limited, Represented By Its Chairman – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of the case and parties involved. (Para 44) |
JUDGMENT :
As a common issue arises in the Writ Appeal and the two Writ Petitions, they are taken up together for consideration and disposed by this common judgment.
W.A.No.44 of 2019 & W.P(C).No.7734 of 2019
The appellant is a consumer of a High Tension Industrial connection from the KSEB and its monthly bill for electricity charges is based on a contract demand plus the rates at applicable tariff for the actual units of electricity consumed. In the agreement entered into with the KSEB, the appellant had specified a contract demand of 155KVA and had declared a connected load of 125KW. During an inspection carried out by the Anti-Power Theft Squad of KSEB on 25.02.2017, however, the connected load in the appellant’s premises was seen to be 290KW in excess of what was declared [125KW]. A provisional assessment notice was therefore served on the appellant under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, proposing to demand an amount of Rs.1,06,90,902/- towards electricity charges, for a period of24 months prior to the date of inspection.
4. In an appeal carried by the appellant to the Appellate Authority under the Electr
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).
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.
The court asserted that the Electricity Appellate Authority exceeded its jurisdiction in contravening statutory mandates under Section 126 while asserting a new method for assessing unauthorized elec....
The Electricity Appellate Authority acted within its jurisdiction in reassessing the duration of unauthorized load as per statutory requirements.
Electricity usage must align with sanctioned load; unauthorized use attracts penalties under the Electricity Act.
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.
Unauthorized use of electricity requires actual consumption beyond contracted load; mere extension of load without use does not constitute violation.
Unauthorized use of electricity under Section 126 requires actual consumption beyond authorized load; mere extension of load without use does not qualify.
The assessment for unauthorized electricity use must be grounded in factual inspections and regulatory definitions, adjusting the calculation period accordingly.
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
