Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.26 seconds)Bombay Electric Supply & Transport ... vs Laffans (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Anr on 21 April, 2005
The scope of the above mentioned section came up for consideration a before the Apex Court in Bombay Electricity Supply and Transport Undertaking v. Laffans (India)(P) Ltd. and Anr. . That was a case where in a routine checking it was noticed that the meter was found to be running slow in the consumer's premises. Accordingly the consumer was informed that the meter would be replaced and revised bill would be issued. The new meter installed was also found running slow. That meter was also replaced by another meter and that meter also got burnt and was replaced by another meter and a bill was raised. The consumer disputed the bill. Since the amount was not paid the notice of disconnection was sent which was challenged before the Bombay High Court. Learned single Judge found no infirmity in the claim and dismissed the Writ Petition. Matter was then taken up in appeal. The Division Bench reversed the decision of the learned single Judge and held that if the licensee disputed the correctness of the meter, it should have referred the dispute to the Electrical Inspector as provided in Section 26(6) of the Act and it was for the Electrical Inspector to estimate the amount of energy supplied to the consumer. The licensee having not referred any such dispute to the Electrical Inspector and consequently no estimate of the energy supplied by it to the consumer having been made, it was not open to the licensee to raise a bill on the basis of average of the past one year's consumption.
M.P.E.B. & Others vs Smt. Basantibai on 10 November, 1987
The question of consumer raising the dispute before the Electrical Inspector under Section 26 does not arise though in a given case consumer can get the meter tested by an independent authority like Electrical Inspector. We may however, add that the situation is different in a case where it is noticed that the consumer has tampered with the meter. In such a situation, it is not a case of defective meter but a case of a tampered meter warranting no interference by the Electrical Inspector. This legal position is well settled by the decision of the apex court in Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board v. Basantibai .
Section 31 in The Indian Electricity Act, 1910 [Entire Act]
Section 26 in The Electricity Act, 2003 [Entire Act]
Section 26 in The Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 [Entire Act]
1