Allowed

K. Baiju v. Deputy Chief Engineer

Kerala HC6 Jun 2016WA/1054/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench allowed the writ appeal. It directed the electricity authority to accept the appellant's dues in five equal monthly installments starting June 25, 2016, keeping coercive steps in abeyance, with default leading to resumption of recovery.

What did the court decide?

Coercive steps kept in abeyance pending payment of entire dues in five equal monthly installments of the amount demanded in Ex.P1 with accrued interest.

K. Baiju Vs Deputy Chief Engineer — Consumer Protection | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/16TH JYAISHTA, 1938 WA.No. 1054 of 2016 IN WP(C).18123/2016

¶5

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 18123/2016 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 24-05-2016

¶6

APPELLANT :

¶7

K. BAIJU, AGED 47, S/O.KARUNAKARAN, HOTEL AMBLAKARA, KP IV/1388, 1389, 1390, PULAMON, KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM 691531.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.PRAVEEN K. JOY SRI.T.A.JOY

¶9

RESPONDENTS :

¶10

DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, KOLLAM.

¶11

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, KOTTARAKARA.

¶12

ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, KOTTARAKARA.

¶13

ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRIC SECTION, KSEB, KOTTARAKARA (EAST).

¶14

SPECIAL OFFICER (REVENUE), KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATTOM, TRIVANDRUM.

¶15

BY SRI.JAICE JACOB,SC,KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

¶16

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WA.No. 1054 of 2016 IN WP(C).18123/2016

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

APPELLANT'S ANNEXURE:-

¶20

ANNEXURE 1 : COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 31.5.2016. RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURE : NIL.

¶21

True copy

¶22

P.A to Judge

¶23

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON & ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JJ.

¶24

W.A.No.1054 of 2016

¶25

-----------------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 6^th day of June, 2016

¶26

JUDGMENT

¶27

Anil K.Narendran, J.

¶28

The appellant is the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.18123/2016.

¶29

The said Writ Petition was filed seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 5 to grant instalment facility for payment of the electricity dues covered by Ext.P1 and to keep in abeyance the recovery proceedings till such payment.

¶30

The learned Single Judge by judgment dated 24.5.2016 disposed of the Writ Petition with the following observation:-

¶31

“2. Learned Standing Counsel submits that the amount claimed in Ext.P1 represents the arrears of electricity charges with reference to the invoice dated 04/05/2016 which represents the amount due from February to April. 3. Taking into consideration the aforesaid factual situation, I do not think that any direction, as sought for, can be granted. However, I only observe that disconnection of electricity facility can be deferred for a period of ten days to enable the petitioner to remit the

¶32

W.A.No.1054 of 2016

¶33

¶34

entire amount as demanded with accrued interest, on or before 05/06/2016.”

¶35

It is aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single

¶36

Judge the appellant is before this Court in this appeal.

¶37

We heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and also the learned Standing Counsel for the KSEB.

¶38

The appellant is a consumer under the 4^th respondent with Consumer No.09/5487. Since there was default on the part of the appellant in remitting the electricity charges, coercive steps were initiated and it was at this juncture he has approached this Court in W.P.(C)No.18123/2016 seeking instalment facility. However the learned Single Judge by the impugned judgment directed him to pay the entire amount as demanded in Ext.P1 with accrued interest on or before 5.6.2016.

¶39

After hearing both the sides and considering the facts

¶40

and circumstances of the case, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ appeal with the following directions:-

¶41

(i) If the appellant is remitting the entire amount demanded in Ext.P1 with accrued interest in 5

¶42

W.A.No.1054 of 2016

¶43

¶44

(five) equal monthly instalments commencing from 25.6.2016 all coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P1 shall be kept in abeyance.

¶45

(ii) In the case of any default on the part of the appellant in remitting any one of the above monthly instalments, it would be open to the respondents to proceed with the coercive steps, in which event the appellant will lose the benefit of instalment facility granted in this judgment.

¶46

Sd/-

¶47

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE

¶48

Sd/- ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE

¶49

skj

¶50

True copy

¶51

P.A to Judge

K. Baiju v. Deputy Chief Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K. Baiju v. Deputy Chief Engineer

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

Inspector General Police Vs Jayan T.K

M.B.Hospital Vs the Secretary, Kerala State Electricity Board

Union of India Vs Raju M.V.

Vijayakumar Vs State of Kerala

Abhilash K Vs State of Kerala

Indhu v. Menon Vs Subash V.S.