Allowed

The Baliapatam Tile Works Ltd. v. Kseb

Kerala HC2 Feb 2009OP/7968/1998

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This original petition was dismissed but the special leave remedy under CMP 13749 was exercised retrospectively to uphold a Division Bench ruling. The court quashed earlier electricity bills and directed the respondent board to levy higher charges only on consumption exceeding 70% of the base average.

What did the court decide?

Exhibits P1 to P3 quashed; Respondents directed to levy charges at the higher rate only on units consumed beyond 70% of base average.

The Baliapatam Tile Works Ltd. Vs Kseb — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 2ND FEBRUARY 2009 / 13TH MAGHA 1930 OP.No. 7968 of 1998(W) ----------------------

¶3

PETITIONER(S):

¶4

¶5

THE BALIAPATAM TILE WORKS LIMITED POST PAPPINISSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶6

BY ADV. SRI.U.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.P.V.LOHITHAKSHAN

¶7

RESPONDENT(S):

¶8

¶9

THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDHUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶10

THE CHAIRMAN, THE KERALA STATE - ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDHUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

THE CHIEF ENGINEER (THERMAL & COMMERCIAL), K.S.E BOARD, VYDHYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶12

THE SPECIAL OFFICER (REVENUE) KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶13

ADV. SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM, SC, KSEB FOR R1TOR4 SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB FOR R1TOR4

¶14

THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/02/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

OP.No. 7968 of 1998

¶16

ORDER ON C.M.P.13749/1998

¶17

DISMISSED

¶18

2.2.2009 SD/- V.GIRI, JUDGE

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

EXHIBITS

¶21

EXT.P1TRUE COPY OF THE BILL DATED 11.3.98 SENT BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER

¶22

EXT.P2TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION DATED 27.3.98

¶23

EXT.P3TRUE COPY OF THE BILL DATED 7.4.98 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER

¶24

EXT.P4TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE BOARD DATED 31.1.98

¶25

(TRUE COPY)

¶26

P.A TO JUDGE

¶27

J.B.KOSHY,Ag.C.J. & V.GIRI, J

¶28

O.P.7968/1998

¶29

Dated this 2^nd day of February, 2009

¶30

JUDGMENT

¶31

Koshy (Ag.C.J.)

¶32

This petition was filed to quash Exts.P1 to P3 and for a declaration that the respondents are entitled to collect the electricity charge at the rate of Rs.3.20 per unit from the petitioner, only on the units of electricity consumed by the petitioner above 32,719 units in a month (70%), from the month of February 1998 onwards. Relief sought for was granted at the time of admission. A Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.808/1998 held that the extra charge is payable only for consumption beyond 70% of the base average. In the above circumstances, Exts.P1 to P3 are quashed. Respondents are directed to levy electricity charges from the petitioner at the higher rate only on excess consumption beyond 70%, and not on the entire consumption.

¶33

O.P. is allowed as above.

¶34

J.B.KOSHY, Acting Chief Justice

¶35

V.GIRI, Judge

¶36

mrcs

The Baliapatam Tile Works Ltd. v. Kseb

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Baliapatam Tile Works Ltd. v. Kseb

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Radhakrishna Rai Vs State Transport Authority

Union of India Vs D.S.Roslind

M.B.Radhakrishnan Vs State of Kerala

V.Ramachandra Reddiar Vs the Asst. Provident Fund Commissioner

Indian Bank Vs Metty Fraancis

A.P.Mohammed Rafeeque Vs Taliparamba Service Co-Op.Bank Ltd.