Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose between the Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and M/s. Excel Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. regarding the demand for electricity dues and the restoration of electricity connection. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana had issued a notice of motion in a writ petition filed by Respondent No.1, challenging Clause 21-A of the Terms and Conditions of Supply under the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, and had granted an unconditional stay on the demand for arrears while directing the restoration of electricity connection. The appellant argued that the stay was unjustified as Respondent No.1 was required to pay substantial dues. Respondent No.1 contended that the auction notice did not stipulate any liability for the dues owed by another respondent. The Supreme Court noted that Respondent No.1 had deposited a sum of Rupees ten lakhs as per a previous order and directed that a further sum of Rupees twenty-five lakhs be deposited in installments to maintain the stay. The Court emphasized that the validity of Clause 21-A was still pending before the High Court and refrained from expressing an opinion on the merits of the case. The appeal was allowed in part, modifying the High Court's order to include conditions for the stay to remain operative. The Court also stated that failure to deposit the required amounts would result in the automatic vacation of the stay and the right of the appellant to disconnect electricity supply.
Headnote
A) Electricity Law - Stay Orders - Justification for Unconditional Stay - Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, Section 49, 79-J - The High Court's unconditional stay on the demand for electricity dues was found legally unsustainable as the appellant was entitled to recover dues under Clause 21-A of the Terms and Conditions of Supply. The Supreme Court modified the order, requiring the respondent to deposit a specified amount to maintain the stay (Paras 1-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court was justified in granting an unconditional stay on the demand for electricity dues and directing the restoration of electricity connection.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal in part, modifying the High Court's order by requiring Respondent No.1 to deposit a further sum of Rupees twenty-five lakhs in installments to maintain the stay on the demand for electricity dues. The Court directed that failure to comply would result in the vacation of the stay and the right of the appellant to disconnect electricity supply.
Law Points
- Electricity supply
- Stay orders
- Terms and Conditions of Supply
- Legal sustainability
- Deposit of dues
