Dismissed

M/S.Safa Plywood Pvt.Ltd. v. the Kerala State Electricity Board

Kerala HC27 Sept 2016RP/768/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala dismissed a review petition filed by a plywood company against the Electricity Board's demand for fixed charges, energy charges, and surcharge. The court held that the underlying judgment correctly based the demand on appellate authority directions and found no error warranting review.

What did the court decide?

Review petition dismissed; original judgment dated 07/07/2016 remains operative.

M/S.Safa Plywood Pvt.Ltd. Vs the Kerala State… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016/5TH ASWINA, 1938

¶5

RP.No. 768 of 2016 (F) ----------------------WP(C) 31768/2007 of THIS HONOURABLE COURT

¶6

REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER :

¶7

M/S.SAFA PLYWOOD PVT. LTD. REGD. OFFICE 1/312 B & C, NEAR INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA, ERUMATHALA P.O., ALUVA-683 105, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SRI. B.H.ABDUL KHADER.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF

¶9

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS :

¶10

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

¶11

2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER ELECTRICAL CIRCLE, KSEB, PERUMBAVOOR.

¶12

3. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER ELECTRICAL SECTION, KSEB, ALUVA TOWN, ALUVA.

¶13

R1 TO R3 BY SMT.P.K.RADHIKA, SC, KSEB

¶14

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-09-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J

¶17

*** * * * * * * * * * * *** Review Petition No.768 of 2016 in W.P.C.No.31768 of 2007

¶18

Dated this the 27^th day of September 2016

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

This review petition has been filed challenging the judgment dated 07/07/2016 in W.P.C.No.31768 of 2007. In the writ petition, the petitioner challenges Ext.P11 issued by the Electricity Board wherein fixed charges as well as energy chargeS has been directed to be paid.

¶21

This Court, in the impugned judgment, had confirmed the demand on the ground that it was based on the directions issued by the appellate authority. In the review petition, learned counsel for the review petitioner submits that the veracity of the bills has not been considered. It is contended that there is no provision to charge fixed charges as well as energy charges and surcharge.

¶22

According to the review petitioner, surcharge is payable only when the amount becomes due. Here surcharge is demanded from August 2003 to October 2007. When an amount is due to the Board and it was due as early as on the date when

¶23

R.P.No.768/2016 in W.P.C.No.31768/2007 2

¶24

the inspection had been conducted, the contention that the surcharge could be levied only after the revised bill is issued is totally out of place and therefore the aforesaid contention cannot be accepted.

¶25

As far as fixed charges is concerned, bill has been raised as per the Regulations, which cannot be doubted at all. In the said circumstances, I do not find any error in the judgment which warrants interference by this Court in a review petition.

¶26

This review petition is hence dismissed.

¶27

(A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE)

¶28

jsr

M/S.Safa Plywood Pvt.Ltd. v. the Kerala State Electricity Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Safa Plywood Pvt.Ltd. v. the Kerala State Electricity Board

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

Fathima P.P. Vs Kannur University

Satheesh Pattani Vs State of Kerala

Mani A.V. Vs the Federal Bank Ltd.

Justin Raj Vs State Bank of India

State Bank of India Vs Shanmugham P.N.

Daniel Vs the Additional District Magistrate