The Tata Hydro-Electric Power Supply ... vs Union Of India on 5 February, 2003
Since the aforesaid admitted factors were not disputed and in
view of the provisions of Section 26(6) of the Act which provides that
electricity quantity supplied could not be quantified for a period exceeding
six months, we are of the view that the finding recorded by the learned
Single Judge does not call for interference by this Court in this appeal.
Apart from the above facts the learned Single Judge has also held that in
view of the law laid down by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court
in The Tata Hydro-Electric Power Supply Co. Ltd. v. Union of India,
reported as 2002(2) RCR(Civil) 183 that the Current Transformer meter is a
meter within the meaning of Section 20 of the Act and the defect in Current
Transformer meter is to be understood as a defect in the electricity meter.
Learned counsel appearing for the appellant failed to dislodge the legal
proposition laid down by the Bombay High Court. So far as interpretation of
Section 26(6) of the Act is concerned, we are satisfied that the learned
Single Judge has correctly construed Section 26(6) of the Act as the
respondent school was not at fault what-so-ever and the fault if any
would lay at the door of the appellant itself. S.26(6) of the Act reads as
follows:-