Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Epdcl vs Kondepudi Bala Raju on 16 February, 2024
APHC010061842019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
:: AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction) [
3310
]
FRIDAY ,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 161 OF 2021
Between:
EPDCL ...APPELLANT(S)
AND
KONDEPUDI BALA RAJU ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Appellant(s):SRI. METTA CHANDRASEKHARA RAO
Counsel for the Respondents
Respondents:
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed aggrieved by the order dated
26.09.2018 passed in O.S.SR.No.1361 of 2018 on the file of the Special
Court under Indian Electricity Act 2003
2003-cum-II Additional District Judge,
East Godavari at Rajamahendravaram.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent is a consumer of
electricity under service Connection No.1413310557000727 of Gopavaram
Village falling under 'category
'category-LT3(A)(I) Industrial Normal of Sub category,
pisci and prawn culture, and that there was an inspection of the aforesaid
service connection of the consumer/respondent on 26.05.2016 by
A.E/D.P.E-1/Rjy
1/Rjy in the presence of P.M.S.Rao and Kasireddy Prasanna
kumar who are representat
representatives
ives of respondent/consumer and other
departmental officials and noticed that the consumer opened the potential
wires and intentionally utilizing supply duly bypassing the meter. Thus it is
prima facie concluded by the Inspecting Officer that the respondent was
dishonestly indulging in theft of energy by meddling with the meter and
preventing the recording of consumption availed by him. Accordingly, the
inspecting officer has prepared his report dated 26.5.2016 and made an
assessment of loss sustained by APEPDC Limited including the supervision
charges and reconnection charges in a sum of Rs.11,75,844/- and
communicated the same to the petitioner for taking further action for
recovery of value of energy pilfered. By virtue of powers vested in him under
general terms and conditions of supply, he demanded the above payment
towards value of the energy pilfered under provisional assessment notice
dated 31.5.2016. Further a criminal case in Cr.No.724/2016 was registered
by APTS police against the respondent on the complaint lodged by the
inspecting officer for the offence of theft of energy by the respondent
punishable under Section 135 of Electricity Act. It is further stated that the
respondent even without making payment of 50% of provisional assessment
amount, he approached this Court by way of filing W.P.No.38827/2016
questioning the validity of provisional assessment notice dated 31.5.2016
and this Court while disposing of the said petition made a direction to
restore the power supply subject to condition of payment of 50% amount
towards value of the energy pilfered and further directed to refer the dispute
relating to final liability under Section 154(5) of the Act to the competent
Court. The Special Court took an objection with regard to maintainability of
suit/application under Section 154(5) of AP Electricity Act to determine Civil
liability.
3. It is stated that the appellant resubmitted the suit/application
with following endorsement that explanation to sub Section 6 of Section 154
of the Act defines Civil liability as loss of damage incurred by the Electricity
board due to the commission of an offence referred to in Sections 135 to 139
of the Act. As per the definition of Civil liability under Section 154(6) of the
Act, the word civil liability under Section 154(5) refers to civil liability due to
the commission offences referred to in Sections 135 to 139 and therefore the
special Court is invested with power to determine the civil liability against a
consumer like the respondent, who is indulged in theft of energy.
4. After careful consideration of all the oral and documentary
evidence, the Court below returned the application as the crime was only
registered, but no charge sheet or report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was filed
and therefore, when the matter does not reach at the stage of disposal of
criminal case, the question of determination of civil liability does not arise.
Thus, Electricity Application O.S. filed by the appellant is unsustainable.
5. Heard Sri Metta Chandra Sekhara Rao, learned counsel for the
appellant as well as learned counsel for the respondent.
6. On hearing, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
Order of the Court below is contrary to law, weight of evidence and
probabilities of the case and the Court below erred in returning Electricity
Application O.S. on the ground that civil liability can't be determined during
the pendency of criminal case. He further submits that the Court below
erred in returning Electricity Application on an erroneous interpretation of
Section 154 of Indian Electricity Act and the Court below failed to consider
that suit is filed by the appellant to determine the civil liability in pursuance
to the directions of this Court order dated 16.11.2016 in WP.No.38827 of
2016. He also submits that the Court below ought to have seen that
criminal case and civil liability lie on an independent footing and the same
can't be interlinked with each other. He further submits that the order of the
Court below is in clear violation of the High Court's order and also the dicta
laid down by this Court and the attract the various judgments holding that
the civil liability to be determined independently by the Special Court under
Section 153 and 154 of Indian Electricity Act. Hence, learned counsel
requests this Court to set aside the impugned order and remand the matter
back for fresh consideration.
7. Per Contra, learned counsel for the respondents does not refute to
the above submissions.
8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, this Court opined
that, without going into the merits, in the interest of justice, inclined to
allow the present appeal by setting aside the impugned order.
9. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed setting aside
the Order dated 26.09.2018 passed in O.S.SR.No.1361 of 2018 on the file of
the Special Court under Indian Electricity Act 2003-cum-I Additional
District Judge, East Godavari at Rajamahendravaram, and remanded the
matter back to the Court below for fresh consideration. Further, the Court
below is directed to complete the trial and conclude the enquiry and pass
appropriate reasoned order, in accordance with law, by affording an
opportunity to the appellant, as expeditiously as possible, from the date of
receipt of a copy of the order.
10. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand
closed.
______________________________
DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J.
Gvl
