- Electricity Act, 1910 (9 of 1910) S. 10, 16 - Telegraph Act, 1885 (13 of 1885) - There is no merit in a plea of the petitioner that the overhead lines cannot be drawn without acquiring the property - The enactments provide for acquisition as well, but there is no compulsion that the State acquires the property over which the overhead lines are drawn - However, the act of laying overhead wires is in the nature of compulsory licence and the provisions of the Telegarph Act and the Electricity Act, 1910 themselves provide for procedure for obtaining compensation. (178) PLR
- Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003) - Petitioner was booked for theft - As per Scheme - It was compoundable - Appeal of the petitioner against the judgment of conviction is pending in the High Court - Court feels no hesitation to conclude that the petitioner is entitled for compounding the offence in view of clause 12 of the Scheme. (173) PLR
- Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003) - Regulation 2007 - Theft of electricity - Calculation has been made by adopting the formula of LDHF while treating the industry to be working as `non continuous process industry' of 24 hours, whereas the industry as per Labour Inspector was working as `single shift' industry - Order set aside - Case remanded. (175) PLR
- Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003) S. 39 - If there had been a dishonest abstraction, the use of perfected artificial means which would render abstraction of energy possible have to be established - It was further necessary to show that there was a dishonest abstracted consumption or use of electric energy by the accused person - No particular provision which would compel a party to challenge it only before the department before coming to Court - Assuming that such rule exists, the exclusion of jurisdiction of a Civil Court will not be readily inferred and if there was a challenge to demand on the ground of violation of natural justice then a Civil Court will always have a right to examine whether the principles of natural justice had been followed. (174) PLR
- Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003) S. 42(8), (5), (6), (7) - Jurisdiction of Civil Court - In fact, sub-section 8 of Section 42 of the Act has the over-riding effect on sub-sections 5, 6 and 7 of Section 42 of the Act, meaning thereby notwithstanding his right under sub-sections 5, 6 and 7, the consumer would be free to avail his other rights, including approaching the civil court, seeking redressal of his grievance. (173) PLR
- Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003) S. 42(8) - Legislature protected the other rights of the consumers, which were not covered under sub-section (5), (6) and (7) of Section 42 - Such a right of the consumer would also include his or her right to approach the Permanent Lok Adalat because supply of power certainly comes within the ambit of Public Utility Services - Any contrary interpretation of Section 42(8) would be against the letter and spirit of the Act and would also defeat the object thereof - Section 145 of the Act, which deals with the jurisdiction of Civil Court, is also limited to the issues arising out of Sections 126 and 127 of the Act. Section 145 of the Act - Legal Service Authority Act, 1987 (39 of 1987). Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. V. Smt. Sulekha. (173) PLR
- Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003) S. 56(2) - No sum due from any consumer, was recoverable after a period of two years from the date on which such sum first became due, unless it could be shown that the said sum was being continuously shown to be recoverable as arrears of charges for electricity supply, where the supply had not been cut off. (183) PLR
- Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003) S. 56(2) - Sum due from consumer - No statutory provision by which the electricity connection allotted to one person, could be held to be the liability of the subsequent purchaser of the land, especially with their being no family or business relation between the previous and subsequent owner of the land. Held, that no statutory provision referred by which the electricity connection allotted to one person, could be held to be the liability of the subsequent purchaser of the land, especially with their being no family or business relation between the previous and subsequent owner of the land. Of course, even if any such relationship existed, the question of personal liability of a successor-in-interest with regard to an electricity connection installed on land purchased, with the electricity connection itself not transferred to the subsequent purchaser, would be a matter which would be gone into on its own merit, again in terms of any statutory provision or contractual liability. (183) PLR
- Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003) S. 126, 135 - Theft of electricity - Report clearly shows that the appellant was found stealing electricity with the help of artificial means and the electricity was being used directly without any meter and thus, it was a case of theft of electricity - Was issued a notice under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, which deals with the theft of electricity - Thus, the appellant cannot claim a notice for provisional assessment and opportunity of hearing, as assessment was not made under Section 126 of the Electricity Act. (176) PLR
- Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003) S. 126(1) - Notice sets out that the petitioner has committed theft by supply of direct current from LT Line by wire and if such an unauthorized use is detected, an assessment which it makes must be taken as an assessment which is provisional under Section 126 (1) - If the electricity Board has decided to lodge a FIR and prosecute for criminal offence, it will be required to prove criminal intent - For making an assessment for unauthorized use, no criminal intent need be established. (178) PLR
- Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003) S. 126(3) - Provisions are mandatory in nature - Once the statute puts an obligation on the authority to do a particular thing in a particular manner, the authority would be duty bound to comply with the provisions of the Act in letter and spirit - Any other interpretation of the provisions of Section 126(3) of the Act would defeat the object of the Act. (174) PLR
- Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003) S. 127 - Connection was meant for commercial purposes, the petitioner is not supposed to run the industry on the said connection. (183) PLR
- Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003) S. 145, 126 - Section 145 of the Electricity Act, 2003 imposes a bar on the Civil Court to entertain a suit only in respect of a matter which an Assessing Officer referred to in Section 126 or an Appellate Authority referred to in Section 127 is empowered to determine the issues - The subject assessment in the instant case had been made based on the commission of theft detected by the officials under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 - For such an assessment made under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003, Section 145 of the Electricity Act, 2003 which imposes a bar on the Civil Court does not have any application. (176) PLR
Subscribe or take a 4 week FREE trial