Skip to main content

Power firms can't change meters unilaterally: HC

A power company cannot unilaterally change a consumer's electricity meter because it suspects the instrument is defective, the Bombay high court has ruledin an important order.

Putting the reins on power companies, Justice Ashok Bhangale, while hearing a two-decade-old case, said that if there was a dispute about the working of a meter, in the absence of allegations of fraud against the consumer, the matter has to be referred to the electricity inspector. Moreover, the inspector can decide on additional charges only for a period up to six months prior to when the dispute was raised.

"Provisions of the Indian Electricity Act manifest that the original correct meter once installed acquires a sacrosanct status. After installation, both parties cannot remove or replace the meter," said the judge.

The court said that if the power company or consumer suspects that a meter is defective, then the matter should be brought before the electricity inspector. The company will not be permitted to replace the meter until its correctness is decided by the officer.

"Doubts about a defective meter must be finally scrutinized and decided by the electrical inspector on a reference made to such authority. The board [Maharashtra State Electricity Board] should not be permitted to instal another meter simply by doubting the correctness of the earlier meter installed by it," said the judge. "Any proposal of substitution of one meter by another should not be permitted until the correctness of the installed meter is decided by electrical inspector as incorrect. Any liberty granted to the board to continue to dislodge and dislocate one meter after another meter unreasonably, arbitrarily , whimsically and without the concurrence of the consumer will encourage mischief and high-handedness of the board and such action is bound to seriously impair the rule of law between the parties."

The court was hearing a dispute that dates back to 1993, when the Maharashtra State Electricity Board (MSEB) issued a notice to Thane-based Hindustan Gas Industries Ltd (HGIL) asking it to pay additional charges as the meter was found to be slow and threatened to disconnect the power supply within 24 hours. HGIL challenged the letter, which was struck down by the civil court in 1999. MSEB challenged the order in the high court.

The court said that the law makes it clear that if a dispute is raised, the limit set is six months prior and the meter reading before that cut-off date is presumed to be correct.

 Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Power-firms-cant-change-meters-unilaterally-HC/articleshow/22955002.cms

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more

When debt is bona fide disputed and the defence is a substantial one, the court will not wind up the company

In SHITAL FIBERS LTD.  vs  INDIAN ACRYLICS LIMITED, as per the respondent, appellant had made a payment of Rs.61,83,218/­. However, there was an outstanding balance of Rs.8,92,723/­ as on 28.7.2008. Since despite repeated requests, balance amount was not paid, the respondent issued a statutory notice to the appellant. The same was duly responded to. As the payment was not made despite notice being duly served on the appellant, the respondent filed the aforesaid Company Petition seeking winding up of the present appellant for its inability to pay admitted debts. The learned Company Judge vide order dated 28.9.2015 admitted the Company Petition. However, while doing so, the learned Company Judge observed, that since the appellant was an on­going concern, an opportunity should be granted to it to settle the accounts with the respondent by 31.12.2015. Only in case of failure of the settlement, the citation was directed to be published. On appeal, the Division Bench of the High Cou...
Post a Comment
Read more

Abusing in-laws a ground for divorce: SC

Abusing in-laws and not allowing them to reside in the matrimonial home by a woman amounts to cruelty to her spouse, ground enough for grant of divorce, the Supreme Court has ruled while allowing an NRI's plea for legal separation from his wife. A bench of Justices Vikaramajit Sen and A M Sapre said such incidents could not be termed as "wear and tear" of family life as held by Madras High Court which had said that a couple must be prepared to face such situations in matrimonial relationship. The NRI had filed a divorce petition alleging that his wife was abusive to his family members and did not allow his parents and siblings to stay in his house when they visited the US. Referring to an incident, the husband told the court that his wife had once locked him and his sister out of the house and abused them saying they belonged to a 'prostitute family'. She refused to allow her sister-in-law to enter the house and even lodged a police complaint against her hu...
4 comments
Read more