Allowed

R.Kanthimathi v. The Assistant Engineer

Madras HC6 Aug 2015WP/8633/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Madras permitted a H.W. petition seeking a new electricity connection. Relying on the Electricity Distribution Code's provision for lawful occupants, the Court mandated the utility to grant the connection within a week after the petitioner submitted required documents.

What did the court decide?

Directed the petitioner to comply with procedural requirements within 10 days and the respondent to grant the electricity connection within one week thereafter.

R.Kanthimathi Vs The Assistant Engineer — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 06.08.2015

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARAN

¶5

Writ Petition No.8633 of 2015

¶6

R.Kanthimathi ... Petitioner

¶7

vs. The Assistant Engineer, Tamil Nadu Housing Borad Office, TANGEDCO/Chennai/West, Avadi, Chennai – 600 054. ... Respondent

¶8

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent herein to effect new electricity service connection to the premises bearing Door No.189/6, 189/7 (Old No.186/6, 187/7), Nehru Bazaar Street, Avadi, Chennai – 600 054 within the time to be stipulated by this Court in accordance with law.

¶9

The petitioner is running a pawn broking business in the property bearing Door No.189/6, 189/7 (Old No.186/6, 187/7), Nehru Bazaar Street, Avadi, Chennai – 600 054. The said business is being carried on right from 1986. The petitioner applied for a service connection to the aforesaid premisses however, one Lakshmi Krishnakumar objected the connection and therefore, the said connection has not been given. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner is before this Court with this writ petition.

¶10

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.

¶11

3.The learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the Mrs.Lakshmi Krishnakumar who is the owner of the above premises has objected to give service connection to the petitioner/tenant premises and therefore, the service connection could not be granted.

¶12

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶13

4.However, Clause 27(4) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code, 2004 would take care of the present position, namely, if, the owner refused to give consent letter to the intending consumer, he shall produce proof of his lawful occupation of the premises and execute indemnity bond in Form No.6 of Annexure III to the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code indemnifying the licensee against any loss of account of disputes arising out off effecting service connection to the occupant.

¶14

5.In view of the above provision, the petitioner is entitled to get service connection. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to comply with the procedures contemplated in Clause 27(4) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code, 2004, within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter, within a period of one week, the respondent is directed to give new service connection to the petitioner. 6.With the above directions, the writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS IV) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar jbm To The Assistant Engineer, Tamil Nadu Housing Borad Office, TANGEDCO/Chennai/West, Avadi, Chennai – 600 054. +1cc to Mr.R.Bharath Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No.40989 +1cc to Mr.P.R.Dhilip Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No.41388 W.P.No.8633 of 2015 KJI(CO) CA(21/08/2015)

¶15

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

R.Kanthimathi v. The Assistant Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Kanthimathi v. The Assistant Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Moinuddin Sheriff Vs The Commissioner

M/s.Mohan Enterprises Vs The Commissioner

M/s.Sudha Ads Vs The Commissioner

Indian Wind Power Association, Vs Union of India

A.shangitha Vs The Assistant Engineer

K.faritha Vs The Assistant Engineer