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

One Sided Clauses In Builder-Buyer Agreements Is An Unfair Trade Practice

In CIVIL APPEAL NO. 12238 OF 2018, Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. vs Govindan Raghavan, an appeal was filed before the Supreme Court  by the builder against the order of the National Consumer Forum. The builder had relied upon various clauses of the Apartment Buyer’s Agreement to refute the claim of the respondent but was rejected by the commission which found the said clauses as wholly one-sided, unfair and unreasonable, and could not be relied upon. The Supreme Court on perusal of the Apartment Buyer’s Agreement found stark incongruities between the remedies available to both the parties. For example, Clause 6.4 (ii) of the Agreement entitles the Appellant – Builder to charge Interest @18% p.a. on account of any delay in payment of installments from the Respondent – Flat Purchaser. Clause 6.4 (iii) of the Agreement entitles the Appellant – Builder to cancel the allotment and terminate the Agreement, if any installment remains in arrears for more than 30 da...
Post a Comment
Read more

Inherited property of childless hindu woman devolve onto heirs of her parents

In Tarabai Dagdu Nitanware vs Narayan Keru Nitanware, quashing an order passed by a joint civil judge junior division, Pune, the Bombay High Court has held that under Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, any property inherited by a female Hindu from her father or mother, will devolve upon the heirs of her father/mother, if she dies without any children of her own, and not upon her husband. Justice Shalini Phansalkar Joshi was hearing a writ petition filed by relatives of one Sundarabai, who died issueless more than 45 years ago on June 18, 1962. Article referred:http://www.livelaw.in/property-inherited-female-hindu-parents-shall-devolve-upon-heirs-father-not-husband-dies-childless-bombay-hc-read-judgment/
Post a Comment
Read more

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.
Post a Comment
Read more