Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (5.15 seconds)State Of Punjab And Anr vs Kuldip Singh And Anr on 8 July, 2002
17. The learned counsel for the appellant also placed reliance upon the
judgment reported as "Punjab State Electricity Board v. Kuldip Singh, 2004 (1)
CPC 657" in which the balance amount was demanded and this Court had held
that the department cannot recover the balance amount beyond the period of 3
years.
M/S. Swastic Industries vs Maharashtra State Electricity Board on 24 January, 1997
18. This view of law taken by this Bench is contrary to the judgment of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported as "M/s Swastic Industries v. Maharashtra
State Electricity Board, AIR 1997 Supreme Court 1101" and the Hon'ble
Supreme Court was pleased to hold that the demand can be raised by the
respondents for the amount left out because of an inadvertent mistake even after
the expiry of 3 years.
Surjit Singh vs Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd on 21 April, 2008
19. The law has also been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the judgment reported as "Surjit Singh v. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd.,
2008 (3) RCR (Civil) 229" that if the telephone connection was in the name of the
husband and a separate telephone connection was in the name of the wife and the
wife was not making the payment of telephone bills, even then the telephone line
of the husband can be disconnected if the wife was financially dependent on her
husband.
1