Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.44 seconds)Narayan Chandra Kundu vs State Of West Bengal And Ors. on 7 August, 2007
It has been held in
the case of Narayan Chandra Kundu Vs. State of West
Bengal and others, reported in AIR 2007 Cal 298 that
"....After going through the provisions contained in
Sections 126 and 135 of the Act we find that the
legislature has intended that the Assessing Officer must
be a person who was actually a member of the
inspection team at the time of detecting the pilferage or
the unauthorized use of the electricity so that he can
pass the order of assessment not on the basis of papers
placed before him but after actually visiting the site at
the time of detection of the illegality....." In the case of
Sri Seetaram Rice Mill (supra), it is held in paragraph-
23 that Section 126 of the Act contemplates the steps to
be taken, which include 'the Assessing Officer is to
conduct inspection of the place or premises and the
equipments, gadgets, machines, devices found connected
or used in such place.' (emphasis supplied).
State Of Punjab vs Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar & Ors.Etc on 7 December, 2011
5. The case law of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is not
applicable to the case at hand as Clause-1 (quoted above) of the
order of Kerala High Court was not under challenge before the
Hon'ble Supreme Court. Further, the co-ordinate Bench of this
Court while arriving at the aforesaid conclusion did not take into
consideration the ratio already settled by this Court as referred
to above.
Section 127 in The Electricity Act, 2003 [Entire Act]
Section 135 in The Electricity Act, 2003 [Entire Act]
1