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

2013 MarsdenLR 881

HIGH COURT MALAYA JOHOR BAHRU
TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD – Appellant
Versus
LTO INJECTION SDN BHD – Respondent


Teo Say Eng JC:

[1] Plaintiff's Case

1.1 The Plaintiff, the supplier of electricity is a public listed company incorporated under the Companies Act 1965.

1.2 The Defendant a private limited company is a registered consumer of the Plaintiff having a consumer account No. 0345-00697335-00 at premises No. 4, Jalan Bukit 3, Kawasan Perindustrian Miel, Seri Alam, 81750 Masai Johor.

1.3 The Plaintiff's claim is premised on Section 38 of the Electricity Supply Act 1990 (hereinafter to be referred to as E.S. Act) for loss of revenue amounting to RM290,489.29 arising from the tampering of the electricity meter on the Defendant's factory premises.

[2] Facts of the Case

On 14 June 2011, the Plaintiff through its staff had carried out an inspection at the Defendant's factory and found that the electric meter and the electrical installation had been tampered with. The Plaintiff carried out repairs and corrections on the said installations.

From the tests carried out, the Plaintiff discovered that the electricity meter failed to record the actual usage of electricity at the premises of the Defendant's factory as a result of the tampering.

The result of the tests carried out shows a short fall in the me

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top