Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3
PETITIONER:
ORISSA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
ORISSA TILES LIMITED
DATE OF JUDGMENT31/03/1993
BENCH:
JEEVAN REDDY, B.P. (J)
BENCH:
JEEVAN REDDY, B.P. (J)
VENKATACHALA N. (J)
CITATION:
1993 SCR (2) 860 1993 SCC Supl. (3) 481
JT 1993 (3) 613 1993 SCALE (2)324
ACT:
Indian Electricity Act, 1910.
Agreement between Electricity Board and Consumer--Provision
for minimum charges--Default in payment of electricity
charges--Disconnection of supply--Liability of consumer to
pay minimum charges for period subsequent to date of
disconnection of supply--Consumer held liable to pay minimum
charges for period subsequent to disconnection.
HEADNOTE:
The respondent-industry entered into an agreement with the
appellant-Board for supply of electricity on 5th March,
1965. Under the agreement, which was valid for five years
i.e. upto 5th March 1970, consumer was obliged to pay
certain minimum charges in any event. However, on 30th
April, 1968 supply of electricity to respondent was
disconnected for non-payment of electricity charges. Since
the respondent also failed to pay the minimum charges for
the period subsequent to the date of disconnection, the
Electricity Board riled a suit for the amount due on account
of the electricity consumed upto April 30, 1968 and for the
minimum charges from May 1, 1968 to March 5, 1970. The
Trial Court decreed the suit.
The respondent preferred an appeal before the High Court
which sustained the Trial Court’s decree only for the period
upto the date of disconnection but disallowed the claim for
the period subsequent to the date of disconnection on the
ground that since the respondent did not avail of any energy
whatsoever during the period subsequent to the disconnection
it was not liable to pay the minimum charges for that
person.
In appeal to this Court it was contended on behalf of the
Electricity Board that in view of the judgment of this Court
in the case of Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna and Ors.
v. M/s Creen Rubber Industries and Ors., [1990] 1 S.C.C. 731
the respondent was liable to pay the minimum charges for the
period subsequent to disconnection.
861
Allowing the appeal and setting aside the order of the High
Court, this Court,
HELD: Clause (13) of the agreement between the parties does
oblige the consumer to pay a certain minimum charges in any
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3
event. The judgment and decree of the Trial Court is
restored. [862 E, 863 D]
Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna & Ors. v. M/s Green
Rubber Industries and Ors., [1990] 1 S.C.C. 731, relied on.
JUDGMENT:
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1496 of 1993.
From the Judgment and Order dated 20.2.1985 of the Orissa
High Court in First Appeal No.139 of 1974
Raj Kumar Mehta for the Appellant.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, J. Heard the counsel for the appellant.
None appears for the respondent though served. Leave
granted.
This appeal by the Orissa State Electricity Board is
preferred against the judgment of the Orissa High Court
allowing partly an appeal preferred .by the respondent. The
dispute pertains to the liability of the consumer
(respondent in this appeal) to pay the minimum charges
during the period subsequent to the date of disconnection of
supply of energy to him for the non-payment of electricity
dues.
The respondent is an industry. It entered into an agreement
with the appellant for supply of electricity on March 5,
1965. The agreement was valid for a period of five years.
He started availing of the energy with effect from July 31,
1965. The supply of his industry was disconnected on April
30, 1968 for non-payment of electricity charges. Since the
consumer also failed to pay the minimum charges for the
period subsequent to the date of disconnection, the Board
filed a suit for the amount due on account of the
electricity consumed between April 1, 1968 and April 30,
1968 and for the minimum charges for the period May 1, 1968
to March 5, 1970. (It may be remembered that the agreement
between parties was valid upto March 5, 1970). The Trial
Court decreed the suit as prayed for along with interest
862
of 6% per annum on the amount decreed from the date of suit
till the date of decree and also future interest at the same
rate till full satisfaction. On appeal, the High Court
sustained the decree of the Trial Court only for the period
upto the date of disconnection (April 30, 1968) but
disallowed the claim for the period subsequent to the date
of disconnection. The reasoning of the High Court is that
inasmuch as the supply was disconnected and the respondent-
consumer did not avail of any energy whatsoever during the
period subsequent to the disconnection, it is not liable to
pay the minimum charges.
In this appeal, it is contended by the learned counsel for
the appellant that the question arising herein is concluded
in favour of the Board by the decision of this Court in
Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna and Ors. v. M/s Green
Rubber Industries and Ors., [1990] 1 S.C.C. 731. On a
perusal of the judgment, we find that was also a case where
the claim inter alia pertained to the period subsequent to
the date of disconnection till the expiry of the agreement.
In that case too, minimum charges were claimed by the Board
even for the period during which the supply remained
disconnected and no energy whatsoever was availed of by the
consumer. We also find that clause (4) of the agreement
considered’ in the said decision and clauses (6) and (13) of
the agreement concerned herein are substantially same.
Clause (13) of the agreement between the parties hereto does
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3
oblige the consumer to pay a certain minimum charges in any
event. The clause reads as follows:
"Clause 13.
The consumer shall (subject to the provisions
hereinafter contained) pay to the Engineer for
the power demand and electrical energy
supplied under this Agreement, the charges to
be ascertained as mentioned below viz.
(Government resolution on tariff to be
inserted here)
LARGE INDUSTRIES: For demand of 125 K.V.A. and
above for supply at 11 K.V. at
(i) Rs.5.50 paise per K.V.A. per month plus
(ii) Rs.0.08 paise per K.W.H. per month
subject to an overall maximum rate of Rs.0.09
paise per K.W.H. and
863
without prejudice to payment of minimum charge
of 75 per cent of the contract demand at the
above rate of Rs.5.50 paise per K.V.A. per
month and subject further to absolute minimum
payment on 125 K.V.A. in the first part of the
tariff.
For less than 250 K.V.A the demand may be
metered in K.W. and charged for at Rs.6.00 per
K.W. per month. Besides the charges for
K.W.H. consumed at the rate specified above.
For supply at M.T. less than 11 K.V.A and M.T.
less that 11 K.V.A. and M.T. the above rate
will be increased by 10%."
The reasons for such a stipulation and its justifiability
are duly and fully explained by this Court in the aforesaid
decision. It is not necessary for us to reiterate the same.
The appeal is accordingly allowed. The Judgment of the High
Court is set aside. The judgment and decree of the Trial
Court is restored. No costs.
T.N.A.
Appeal allowed.
864