Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Show Cause Notice Issuance - The show cause notice was issued within the prescribed period and not based on assumptions or presumptions. It was issued without jurisdiction, as the petitioner argued, since they are not classified as a service provider under the relevant statutes. Importantly, the notice did not demand service tax for transmission or distribution of electricity. M/s.Tamil Nadu Transmission vs The Commissioner of GST & - Madras
Demand for Additional Costs and Charges - Several demand notices, including one dated 31.01.2014, raised substantial amounts (e.g., Rs. 6,39,981.61) for costs related to electrical connections or related services. The petitioner contended that interest could not be charged for prior periods and challenged the validity of these demands. Dhananjay Kumar VS State of Bihar - Patna
Legal Proceedings and Disputes - Multiple cases involve disputes over demand notices issued under legal provisions (e.g., Section 8 of I&B Code, or for unpaid dues). The corporate or operational debtors have disputed notices, claiming procedural lapses or wrongful demands, and have filed petitions challenging the validity or maintainability of these notices. EASY ENERGY SOLUTIONS INDIA LLP VS GLOOB INTERIOR DESIGN PVT LTD - National Company Law Tribunal, mr. mohammad moinuddin khan vs saraswati wire & cable industries & anr. - National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
Electrical Connection and Cost Recovery - The authorities approved the erection of electrical installations, including transformers and meters, with detailed specifications. Demands for costs related to transformer repairs or unauthorized use, such as theft or excess load, have been made, with some cases involving recovery from bills or legal proceedings. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY APPELLATE AUTHORITY - Kerala, M/s. Sree Rama Electricals and Civil works vs Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Ltd - Telangana
Challenging Demand Notices for Household 3-Phase Connection - The petitioner challenged demands for 3-phase household connections, arguing that the initial sanction and estimates were properly issued, and that charges related to the connection are baseless. In some instances, authorities directed the allotment of 3-phase meters and sanctioned connections, but subsequent charges or show-cause notices were contested. Mohamed Jibril John H vs The Superintending Engineer - Madras, Mohamed Jibril John H vs The Superintending Engineer - Madras
Cost of Erection and Additional Charges - When the demand notices involve costs for erection of substations, feeders, or augmentation, the licensee or developer is often responsible for these expenses, especially if the demand exceeds certain load thresholds (e.g., 4000 KVA). The petitioner disputes additional charges for repairs or excess load, asserting procedural or contractual compliance. Impact Projects Private Limited VS Punjab State Power Corporation Limited - Punjab and Haryana, M/s. Vinayaka Cotton Mills P Ltd vs The Vidyut Ombudsman for the State of Telangana - Telangana
Analysis and Conclusion:
The core issue revolves around the legality and validity of demand notices issued to the petitioner concerning household 3-phase connections. The petitioner contends that the show cause notices and demands are either issued without jurisdiction, based on incorrect assumptions, or involve unjustified costs, such as demands for extra posts or exorbitant charges. Several cases highlight procedural lapses, disputes over charges, and the challenge of demands for costs related to erection, repair, or excess load.
In particular, authorities have issued approvals and sanctioned connections, with some cases showing proper compliance, yet subsequent demands for additional costs or charges have been contested on legal and procedural grounds. The courts or tribunals have been approached to quash or challenge these notices, emphasizing that demands must be within jurisdiction, correctly calculated, and supported by proper procedures.
References:- M/s.Tamil Nadu Transmission vs The Commissioner of GST & - Madras- Dhananjay Kumar VS State of Bihar - Patna- EASY ENERGY SOLUTIONS INDIA LLP VS GLOOB INTERIOR DESIGN PVT LTD - National Company Law Tribunal- THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY APPELLATE AUTHORITY - Kerala- Impact Projects Private Limited VS Punjab State Power Corporation Limited - Punjab and Haryana- Mohamed Jibril John H vs The Superintending Engineer - Madras- Mohamed Jibril John H vs The Superintending Engineer - Madras- M/s. Sree Rama Electricals and Civil works vs Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Ltd - Telangana- mr. mohammad moinuddin khan vs saraswati wire & cable industries & anr. - National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
In the realm of utility services and contractual obligations, demand notices play a crucial role in asserting claims and initiating legal proceedings. A common question that arises is: Can a demand notice issued for a household 3-phase electrical connection be challenged if it includes additional claims such as infrastructure costs or extra posts? This blog aims to clarify the legal principles involved, based on relevant case law and legal interpretations.
The primary concern in such cases revolves around the validity of demand notices issued under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Specifically, whether including claims beyond the cheque amount—like infrastructure costs or additional charges—affects the notice's legality. The question is particularly pertinent when the notice pertains to a 3-phase household connection, which often involves substantial infrastructure and associated costs.
According to legal precedents, a demand notice under Section 138 must explicitly demand the cheque amount. As clarified in a key judgment, the phrase said amount of money in the proviso to Section 138 refers to the cheque amount itself [
#LegalAdvice #ElectricalConnections #DemandNotice
The show cause notice was issued not based on assumptions or presumptions, as stated by the petitioner. ... The show cause notice has been issued within the period of limitation. The notice has been issued invoking larger period of limitation of five years, as contended by the petitioner, is incorrect. ... Thus, the show cause notice....
The petitioner has also prayed for quashing the consequential fresh demand notice dated 31.01.2014, issued by the Revenue Officer, Bihar State Housing Board, Patna. ... The Board had then issued a fresh demand notice dated 31.01.2014, raising a demand of Rs. 6,39,981.61/-. 4. ... The Board had then issued a fresh demand#HL_E....
A demand notice was issued on 04.11.2019 under section 8 of the I&B Code. Since payment was not received, the present Petition has been filed. 15. The Corporate Debtor has filed IA/934/2020 challenging the maintainability of the Company Petition. ... 3. … despite repeated requests and reminders no efforts were taken by yourself to complete the pending work at both the sites which resulted in delay and #H....
Electrical inspector, on receipt of the application issued an approval scheme dated 26.09.2007 for erection of electrical installation for 214.866 KW additional load. Statutory notice of commencement of work under Rule 50 of Indian Electricity Rule, 1956 was communicated. ... The transformer installed in the premises is having a capacity of 500 KVA and the meter installed is bearing serial No D 20490 3 phase#HL_E....
In such a case, the erection or augmentation of grid sub-station, if required, shall be carried out by the licensee at its cost. ... The expenditure incurred by the distribution licensee for erection of 11KV feeder's including from feeding substation to the connection point shall also be born by the developer. ... If the connection is released to of residents/the colony/complex by tappin....
The Executive Engineer himself has directed the Assistant Engineer to allot 3 phase connection and giving the 3 phase meter on 04.09.2021 itself and sanctioned the connection on 06.09.2021. ... At the first instance, the petitioner, has the power for preparing estimates for all categories for assigning service connection, including 3 ....
Dear Sir, We are writing this to ensure clarity on your letter reference Form No: 3 Dated 25th August, 2021 and letter received on 15th November, 2021 regarding the Demand Notice/Invoice Demanding Payment. ... Present is a case where notice of dispute was clearly issued by the Corporate Debtor which has been acknowledged by the Operational Creditor. ... Explanation. –....
It is the case of petitioner that the agreement enterered by the petitioner is only for “Erection of 33/11 KV Sub-Station with 33 KV and 11 KV lines along with Civil Works”. ... As per the Agreement dated 06.11.2018, the entire safe custody of all the materials lies with the petitioner; and further the respondents have been demanding the petitioner to pay the ....
The Executive Engineer himself has directed the Assistant Engineer to allot 3 phase connection and giving the 3 phase meter on 04.09.2021 itself and sanctioned the connection on 06.09.2021. ... At the first instance, the petitioner, has the power for preparing estimates for all categories for assigning service connection, including 3 ....
Hence, back-billing notice dated 15.09.2018 was issued to petitioner demanding Rs. 12,50,168/- towards excess load on service connection bearing Sc. No. 3501 00901 directing them to pay within 15 days from the date of said notice. ... It is stated that back-billing assessment notice dated 01.06.2019 was issued to petitioner ....
3. On 3.3.2006 the petitioner and the respondent entered into another memorandum of understanding noting that the petitioner had developed a nitrile based female condom (hereinafter referred to as FC2), having similar features to the FC1 and the parties agreed to promptly enter into discussion and subject to the result of the same, negotiate a formal agreement to include a non-disclosure of confidential information clause. The manufacture of FC2 in India was to be conducted in two ph....
The dispute, as noticed hereinbefore related to appointment in Phase 3 and Phase 4 only. 21. In K. Jayamohan v. State of Kerala, (1997) 5 SCC 170, this Court held: It is not the contention of the respondents that the State Government acted mala fide.
Learned Counsel contended that nowhere in the civil law, maintenance after annulment of marriage is contemplated. He placed reliance in the case of “D. Velusamy Vs. D. Patchiammal”, [(2010) 10 SCC 469]. He further submitted that since the petitioner has left the shared household and since there is no relationship in the nature of marriage also, the petitioner is not entitled to maintenance under the domestic Violence Act. According to him Section 3(d) (iv) is related to 'shared house....
Parameters Banderdeva Holongi Remarks 1. Runway size 2250m x 45m 2300mx45m Ph-I 2800mx45m Ph-II For A-321 For B-767 2. Basic strip 2370mx300m 2420mx300m Ph-I 2920mx300m Ph-II 3. RESA 90mx90m on both ends 90mx90m on both ends 4. Nav. aids DVOR DVOR, * ILS *will be finalised after detailed survey 5. Isolation Bay One taxiway to be used Separate bay 6. Accordingly, the cost of certain parameters which are required for the ultimate development in the case of Holongi has been segregated ....
5. The learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submitted that in spite of the demand notice issued on 29.5.2000 seeking a sum of Rs.18,084/-, which amount was demanded due to the capitalisation of interest and difference in cost, the petitioner is not justified in challenging the impugned demand notice.
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
