SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Mad) 3836

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
Mahalakshmi Plastics – Petitioner
Versus
The Puducherry Industrial Promotion Development and Investment Corporation Limited – Respondent
W.P. No. 18930 of 2017
Decided On : 15-11-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: T. Saikrishnan.
For the Respondents: D. Ravichander, V. Usha.

Headnote:

Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 - Electricity Act, 2003 - Section 56(2) - Indian Electricity Act, 1910 - Section 24 - Seeking a Writ of Mandamus - Lessor of the premises (PIPDIC) before re-allotting - Recovery of any arrears - petitioner firm was allotted the industrial Plot and R.S.No. (Part) at PIPDIC Industrial Estate - lease deed was executed by the first respondent - Held, Petitioner has in fact requested for connection in the year 2017 itself and even after such application - Respondents 2 to 4 have not intimated the dues within one month to petitioner as per Regulation - It is mandatory on the part of the respondents 2 to 4 to provide - Writ petition is allowed

ORDER :

Prayer: Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 2 to 4 to effect new power supply to the petitioner's industry at the Industrial Plot allotted in No. B-57, measuring 648 Sq.M. comprised in R.S.No. 37/2 (Part) and R.S.No. 37/4 (Part) at PIPDIC Industrial Estate, Sedarapet Revenue Village, Puducherry without reference to any alleged arrears of the erstwhile allottee of the said industrial plot.

1. This writ petition has been filed seeking a Mandamus directing the Respondents 2 to 4 to effect new power supply to the petitioner's industry at the Industrial Plot allotted in No. B-57, measuring an extent of 648 Sq.M., comprised in R.S.No. 37/2 (Part) and R.S.No. 37/4 (Part) at PIPDIC Industrial Estate, Sedarapet Revenue Village, Puducherry without reference to any alleged arrears of the erstwhile allottee of the said industrial plot.

2. It is the case of the writ petitioner that petitioner firm was allotted the industrial Plot bearing No. B-57, measuring an extent of 648 Sq.M. in R.S.No. 37/2(Part) and R.S.No. 37/4(Part) at PIPDIC Industrial Estate, Sedarapet, Puducherry on lease basis. A lease deed was executed by the first respondent on 02.05.2016, in favour of the Petitioner granting long time lease for a period of 99 years. The said document has been registered at the Office of the Sub-Registrar, Villianur.

3. The petitioner has also paid a sum of Rs.2,91,600/- by way of premium to the first respondent and has also been regularly paying the rent. He has also paid a sum of Rs.7,51,455/- to the first respondent towards the cost of the superstructure that was existing in the said property. The property was handed over to the petitioner in May, 2017.

4. The petitioner has made an application for availing power supply for its unit to the fourth respondent. The fourth respondent orally informed the petitioner that power supply cannot be granted to the plot allotted to the petitioner by the first respondent due to the fact that the erstwhile allottee, one Sri Vetrivelan Enterprises were in arrears of huge amounts to the Electricity Department and unless such amounts are paid by the petitioner that they will not be in a position to effect power supply to the petitioner.

5. It is the contention of the writ petitioner that the first respondent did not put the petitioner on notice about the said alleged arrears of the electricity charges left by the erstwhile allottee at the time when the allotment was made to the petitioner to till date. The first respondent has allotted the land together with the building free of any charges or claims so that the petitioner could commence its industrial activities in the said industrial plot and it is only based on the representation made by the first respondent that the industrial plot came to be taken on lease by the petitioner for running its manufacturing unit by paying huge premium and also paying the cost towards the superstructure to the first respondent.

6. The petitioner has also obtained all the requisite licenses and permissions under the various authorities like the Inspector of Factories, Puducherry, Pollution Control Committee and the local bodies. When the petitioner has made all the necessary arrangements for commencing the industrial activities by making huge investments, the petitioner is put to great shock due to the refusal by the Respondents 2 to 4 to grant power supply to the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the aforesaid direction.

7. Counter affidavit has been filed by the third respondent and adopted by the second and fourth respondents. It is their contention that Plot No B-57 at the PIPDIC Industrial Estate at Sedharapet, Puducherry, was originally allotted to M/s.Sri Vetrivelan Products. The above electricity service connections were effected on 23.05.2003, based on Lease Deed executed on 31.10.1994, between the General Manager Development of PIPDIC an

                  Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                  1
                  2
                  3
                  4
                  5
                  6
                  7
                  8
                  9
                  10
                  11
                  SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                  supreme today icon
                  logo-black

                  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

                  qr

                  Scan Me!

                  India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                  For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                  whatsapp-icon Back to top