Disposed

T.P. George v. Shimmy Thomas & Others

Kerala HC1 Aug 2016WP(C)/19931/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenging an electricity demand notice against a firm's property was noted. The court directed the petitioner to seek necessary clarification or modification from the respondent Board before approaching the writ court, finding no necessity to decide on merits at this stage. The petition was closed.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was closed with a direction to the petitioner to approach the respondent Board for clarification/modification first.

T.P. George Vs Shimmy Thomas & Others — Kerala HC (2016) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

MONDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2016/10TH SRAVANA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 19931 of 2008 (W) ----------------------------

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

T.P. GEORGE, VYPEL HOUSE, VELOOR VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.P.P.JACOB

¶9

RESPONDENT(S): --------------

¶10

1. SHIMMY THOMAS, S/O THOMAS, KATHAKUNNEL MANAKKADU, THODUPUZHA, MANAKKADU PO. 2. JOSHY, S/O.SCARIA, KATHAKUNNEL MANAKKADU THODUPUZHA, MANAKKADU PO.

¶11

3. GEORGE THALACHIRAYIL HOUSE KARIMBANKARA, IDUKKY, IDUKKI VILLAGE,

¶12

KARIMBANKARA PO.

¶13

4. JOSEPH SCARIA, S/O.SCARIA KATHAKUNNEL MANAKKADU, THODUPUZHA, MANAKKADU PO.

¶14

5. KERALA STATEEELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL SECTION NO.1, THODUPUZHA, REP. BY ITS ASSISTANT ENGINEER.

¶15

6. KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS, CHIEF EXECUTIVE/SECRETARY.

¶16

R5 BY ADV. SRI.S.SHARAN,SC,K.S.E.BOARD R6 BY ADV. SRI.BASANT BALAJI, SC,

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

K.V.

¶19

WP(C).NO.19931 OF 2008

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER (S)'EXHIBITS

¶22

P1: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 16.01.1996 EXECUTED BY RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER.

¶23

P2: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 16.06.2005 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

¶24

P3: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 2.07.2005.

¶25

P4: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN WP(C) 22878/2005 DATED 8.08.2005.

¶26

P4: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY FIFITH RESPONDENT PRODUCED ALONG WITH STATEMENT BEFORE COURT.

¶27

P5: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY FIFITH RESPONDENT PRODUCED ALONG WITH STATEMENT BEFORE COURT.

¶28

RESPONDENT(S)'EXHIBITS NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.S.TO JUDGE

K.V.

A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.

¶33

W.P.(C) No.19931 of 2008

¶34

Dated this the 1^st day of August, 2016

¶35

JUDGMENT

¶36

This writ petition has been filed inter alia seeking for a direction to respondent Nos.5 and 6 to proceed against the property of the firm for recovering the amount due as per Ext.P2 and challenging Ext.P2.

¶37

The issue is with reference to the rights and liabilities of the parties in regard to the liability to pay the amount demanded by the Kerala State Electricity Board. The petitioner in fact challenged the demand as well as the rate of energy that had been charged while making the said demand.

¶38

Service was not complete as notice could not been served on respondent Nos.1, 2 and 4.

¶39

Learned counsel for the petitioner however submits that they had already approached the Board for necessary modification/clarification of the demand made.

¶40

Under such circumstances, I am of the view that there is no necessity to consider the writ petition on merits. It shall

¶41

W.P.(C) No.19931 of 2008

¶42

¶43

be open for the petitioner to take up the matter before the Board and seek for necessary modification/clarification in the matter. If the petitioner is aggrieved by any such directions issued, the petitioner will have the right to challenge the same in appropriate proceedings. Writ petition is therefore closed.

¶44

Sd/- A.M. SHAFFIQUE

¶45

JUDGE

¶46

Scl/01.08.2016

T.P. George v. Shimmy Thomas & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.P. George v. Shimmy Thomas & Others

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

Samad T.P Vs State of Kerala

Kerala State Electricity Board Vs Joseph M.Kallivayilil

Sony Pictures Networks India Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Union of India

R.Jayakumar Vs Branch Manager United Bank of India

Thomas P.Oomen Vs Tahsildar & Others

Trinity Medical Centre Vs the Intelligence Inspector