Heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned.

2. It has been stated that the petitioner is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. It is carrying on business in manufacturing transmission and distribution of equipments relating to the power sector. It has been further stated that the property of the petitioner, at Vadalur, had been purchased by Padam Challani, in the auction proceedings, held on 9.7.2003, in O.A.No.355 of 2001. The auction had been conducted by the Debts Recovery Tribunal (I), Mumbai. The auction had been confirmed in the name of Padam Challani and a sale certificate had been issued to him. Thereafter, Padam Challani, had sold the properties to the petitioner, by way of a registered sale deed, dated 7.3.2007.

3. It has been further stated that, at the time of the purchase of the property, by the petitioner, it had been informed that the electricity service connection, given in favour of the previous owner of the property, had been disconnected, during the year, 1990. Nothing had been stated about the deposit which it made for obtaining the electricity service connection. The petitioner had been informed that it had to apply for an electricity service connection, as a new applicant. The petitioner had obtained a fresh electricity service connection for its premises, in H.T.S.C.No.118/TF/IA/SD/2110 KVA. The earlier electricity service connection given to Seshasayee Industries Limited, Vadalur, had been disconnected, on 16.10.1990. While so, the petitioner had been served a notice, dated 31.12.2011, by the second respondent, asking the petitioner to remit the sum of Rs.13,53,867/- towards the outstanding dues, relating to H.T.S.C.No.4/TF.I/SD/4200 KVA given to the erstwhile owner of the property belonging to the petitioner.

4. It had also been stated that after issuing of notices to the previous consumer, the accounts had also been closed, on 22.11.2001, and the amount of Rs.9,21,847/-, available with the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, had been adjusted towards the dues payable by the erstwhile owner of the property concerned. The petitioner had become the owner of the property only by way of the sale deed, dated 7.3.2007. In such circumstances, the petitioner is not liable to pay the amount claimed by the second respondent, as it is barred by limitation. The payment made by the second respondent is not enforceable, as per Section 56 (2), read with Regulation 21 of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, 2004. The petitioner cannot be considered as a consumer within the meaning of Rule 2(g) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, 2004, in view of the fact that the earlier electricity service connection given to Seshasayee Industries Limited, Vadalur, had not been restored. The new electricity service connection had been given to the petitioner, on payment of the necessary charges. Therefore, it would not be proper for the second respondent to pass the impugned order asking the petitioner to remit a sum of Rs.13,53,867/-, towards the dues.

5. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. It has been stated that the petitioner is an agreement holder. It is bound by the terms and conditions of the supply of the electricity, as per the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code and the distribution code.

6. It had been noted that the electricity service connection, in H.T.S.C.No.4/TF.I/SD/ 4200 KVA, given to M/s. Seshasayee Industries Limited, Vadalur, had been disconnected, on 16.10.1990, due to nonpayment of the electricity charges. The account had been closed, on 22.11.2001. It was found that the outstanding dues of M/s. Seshasayee Industries Limited was Rs.4,80,937/-. In the meantime, the Government of Tamil Nadu had issued an order in favour of the petitioner, to avail certain facilities in the existing and newly effected service connection, by way of a Government order, in G.O.Ms.No.35, Industries (MIA 1) Department, dated 31.3.2010. Accordin