definition of 'premises' has been changed subsequently in the Electricity Supply Code of 2005 and the Electricity Supply Code of 2014, so as to include even the land appurtenant to the buildings to which the connection has been granted, the said regulations also contemplate an exclusion of liability to the subsequent owner of the premises in respect of the default in the payment of dues to the electricity board occassioned by the erstwhile owner, making the defaulter principally liable for the defaulted amounts. In the instant case, it is not in dispute that, the petitioner had purchased 30 cents of land from the 4th respondent, which extent of land did not contain thereon the building to which the electric supply was granted by the respondent board. The petitioner was a bona fide purchaser for value of the said extent of 30 cents of land, purchased by her from the 4th respondent. Inasmuch as the Regulations in force during the particular time, namely, the 1990 Regulations, did not include immovable property other than buildings, within the definition of premises, for the purposes of the regulation, it would follow that the mere purchase of land by the petitioner would not saddle the petitioner with a liability in respect of the defaulted dues of the 4th respondent to the electricity board. As already noted, the petitioner did not purchase the building to which the electric connection had been granted, and hence it could not be said that the petitioner had succeeded to the ownership of the “premises” in respect of which,
