Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.22 seconds)M/S Isha Marbles vs Bihar State Electricity Board on 3 February, 1995
13. It is necessary to notice what the Supreme Court has said in the aforesaid Isha Marbles case. In paragraph 63, the Supreme Court has held thus:
Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd vs Gujarat Inns. Pvt. Ltd. And Ors on 16 March, 2004
5. Per contra, the learned Counsel for the respondents contends that the law laid down in the aforesaid two judgments has no application to the facts of this case. In the sale deed which is executed in favour of the petitioner the petitioner has agreed to pay its liability of arrears of electricity charges. Secondly, he contended that in view of Regulation 4.34 of the Karnataka Electricity Board Electricity Supply Regulations, 1988, a right is conferred on the respondents to demand and collect the arrears payable by the erstwhile owner before giving connection. In the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court it is held that in the absence of any statutory provision or a charge created on the property the purchaser is not under obligation to discharge the arrears and therefore, he submits that the petitioner is not entitled to the relief sought for.
Krishnappa (Deceased) By L.R. vs Karnataka Electricity Board, ... on 19 July, 2000
In fact, the aforesaid provision of law was challenged before the Court as unconstitutional in W.P. No. 31929 of 1994, DD: 19-7-2000 in the case of Krishnappa (deceased) by L.R. v. Karnataka Electricity Board, Bangalore and Anr., 2000(6) Kar. L.J. 153. After considering the rival contentions and relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court referred to supra and others, this Court held that:
Section 29 in The State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 [Entire Act]
1