Dismissed

The Kgisl Trust v. The Government of TamilNadu

Madras HC13 Jul 2023WP/15547/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by KGISL Trust challenging TANGEDCO shifting liability from KGISIL to the Trust. The Court held that since the matter was pending before the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity, the Trust must seek remedies there instead of this Court.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

The Kgisl Trust Vs The Government of TamilNadu — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.15547 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 13.07.2023

¶4

CORAM : JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE

¶5

W.P.No.15547 of 2023 and WMP.No.15062 & 19126 of 2023

¶6

The KGISL Trust Rep by its Authorised Signatory Dr.R.Maheswaran, S/o.Y.Rajagopal Having Office at : No.365, KGISL Campus Thudiyalur Road Saravanampatti Coimbatore - 641 035.

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Government of Tamil Nadu Represented by Secretary to Government Energy Department Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

¶10

2.The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Regulatory Commission

¶11

Represented by its Secretary No.18, Third Main Road, Seethammal Colony Alwarpet, Chennai - 600 018.

¶12

3.The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Represented by its Chairman No.800, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

¶13

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/6

¶14

W.P.No.15547 of 2023

¶15

4.The Superintending Engineer Coimbatore Electricity Distribution Circle / North Tatabad, Coimbatore - 641 012.

¶16

5.The K.G.Information Systems Private Limited Rep by its Managing Director K.G.Campus, Thudiyalur Road Saravanampatti, Coimbatore - 641 035. ...Respondents

¶17

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records in Lr.No.SE/CEDC/N/CBE/DFC/AO/REV/AAO/HT/A4/F.KGISL/D.287/23

¶18

dated 05.05.2023 on the file of the fourth respondent and quash the same, consequently direct the fourth respondent to remove excessive amount entered in service connection 039094300422.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Sudhakar

¶20

For Respondents : Mr.P.Wilson, Senior Counsel Assisted by Mr. L.Jai Venkatesh Standing Coursel for R2 to R4

¶21

Mr.S.J.Mohamed Sathik Government Advocate for R1

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

The grievance of the petitioner is that the TANGEDCO has passed on the liability of the fifth respondent on it, and hence, challenges the same.

¶24

2/6

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/6

¶26

W.P.No.15547 of 2023

¶27

Outlining the line of defence of TANGEDCO, the learned Senior Counsel submitted that the Trustees of the petitioner's Trust were the Directors in the Board of the fifth respondent. The fifth respondent intimated TANGEDCO of its proposal to wind up the company, and requested for transfer of its liability, security deposit, service connection along with the load allotted, to the petitioner and also trusted the Board Resolution to that effect. Since the Board of Directors themselves are the Trustees of the petitioner's Trust, TANGEDCO also acceded to the said request. Once what was requested was accomplished, the same Trustees were once the Directors of the fifth respondent engaged in double speak and present an innocent face before the Court as they have been victimized.

¶28

The learned Senior Counsel appearing for TANGEDCO also brought to the notice of the Court, that the subject of the present writ petition has already been under challenge before the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity, which has taken cognizance of the matter in A.No.114 of 2023, and this appeal was filed by the fifth respondent. Now inasmuch as the fifth respondent has passed on the liability to the petitioner, the petitioner has to work out its remedy before the Appellate Tribunal. The learned Senior Counsel also added that the fifth

¶29

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/6

¶30

W.P.No.15547 of 2023

¶31

respondent has not moved a stay application before the Appellate Tribunal, and to get over the same, the petitioner now has moved this writ petition.

¶32

To a query by this Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it was true that the erstwhile Board of Directors of the fifth respondent are the Trustees of the petitioner.

¶33

Those who appeared as Directors is now appearing as Trustees, and has informed they have taken a conscious decision to transfer the liability of the company including the security deposit and the loan to the petitioner Trust. Though the Trust and the Private Limited Company can be considered as different entities in law, if the veil is lifted, this Court seems the same set of persons controlling the affairs of both the entities.

¶34

This Court cannot appreciate the current strategy of the petitioner in approaching this Court, instead of moving the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity in A.No.114/2023. The petitioner will now be at liberty to approach the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity for appropriate remedies.

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/6

¶36

W.P.No.15547 of 2023

¶37

In the result, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently,

¶38

connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶39

13.07.2023

¶40

Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order ds

¶41

To:

¶42

1.The Secretary to Government Government of Tamil Nadu Energy Department Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

¶43

2.The Secretary Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Regulatory Commission No.18, Third Main Road, Seethammal Colony Alwarpet, Chennai - 600 018.

¶44

3.The Chairman Tamil Nadu Electricity Board No.800, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

¶45

4.The Superintending Engineer Coimbatore Electricity Distribution Circle / North Tatabad, Coimbatore - 641 012.

¶46

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/6

W.P.No.15547 of 2023

N.SESHASAYEE.J.,

W.P.No.15547 of 2023

13.07.2023

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/6

The Kgisl Trust v. The Government of TamilNadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Kgisl Trust v. The Government of TamilNadu

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

C.Natarajan Vs The District Collector

Er.R.Niranjan Vs Director

Kowsiya Vs Regional Passport Officer

Annaii Medical College and Hospital Vs The Registrar

S.Murugan Vs the Director

Tamizhaga Cable Tv Operators Vs Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable Tv Corproation Limited