Kerala High Court
Believers Church, ... vs The Kerala State Electricity Board ... on 10 June, 2025
Author: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
Bench: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
2025:KER:40626
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
TUESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 20TH JYAISHTA, 1947
WA NO. 1930 OF 2024
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 04.10.2024 IN WP(C) NO.4917 OF
2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER:
BELIEVERS CHURCH, THIRUVALLA,REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING TRUSTEE, REV. BISHOP DR.SAMUEL MATHEW
AGED 59 YEARS
S/O. MATHEW, KAITHAPPATALIL, THIRUVALLA TALUK,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, KERALA STATE, ST.THOMAS NAGAR,
PUNNAKUNNAM MURI, KUTTAPPUZHA VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA
TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, KERALA STATE- THROUGH
HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER AND MANAGER OF BELIEVERS
CHURCH MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL, FR.SIJOMON
PANDAPPALLIL, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O. P.D. JOSE, BCTS 32,
VARIKKAD, KUTTAPPUZHA P.O., THIRUVALLA TALUK,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, KERALA STATE., PIN - 689103
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.HARIDAS
SHRI.BIJU HARIHARAN
SRI.P.C.SHIJIN
SMT.ROSHIN MARIAM JACOB
SMT.SHIJIMOL M.MATHEW
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS
1 THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMITED
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, VYDYUTHI
BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695004
W.A. No.1930 of 2024
2
2025:KER:40626
2 THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY REGULATORY
COMMISSION
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON, K.P.F.C.
BHAVANAM, CV RAMAN PILLAI ROAD, VELLAYAMBALAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA,, PIN - 695010
3 CONSUMER GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL FORUM,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON
2ND FLOOR, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, KSE BOARD,
KOTTARAKKARA., PIN - 691506
4 THE SPECIAL OFFICER (REVENUE)
OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL OFFICER (REVENUE),
VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695004
5 THE CHIEF ENGINEER (TRANSMISSION SOUTH)
THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMITED,
VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695004
6 THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER
ELECTRICAL CIRCLE, TRANSMISSION CIRCLE,
POOVANTHURUTHU.P.O, POOVANTHURUTHU,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,, PIN - 686012
7 THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL
SECTION, KUTTAPPUZHA, 110 K V SUBSTATION,
THRIKKODITHANAM.P.O, THRIKKODITHANAM,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,, PIN - 686105
BY ADV SRI.NANDAGOPAL S.KURUP
OTHER PRESENT:
ADV C JOSEPH ANTONY
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.06.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.A. No.1930 of 2024
3
2025:KER:40626
JUDGMENT
Dr. A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar, J.
This writ appeal preferred by the appellant/Consumer of
electricity from the respondent/Board impugns the judgment dated
04.10.2024 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.4917 of 2024
2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of this Writ Appeal
are as follows:
The appellant had approached the writ court aggrieved by Ext.P23
order of the State Electricity Ombudsman, Ernakulam in an appeal
preferred by the appellant against the order of the Consumer Grievance
Redressal Forum. The essence of the dispute between the appellant and the
Board was with regard to a bill raised on the appellant demanding arrears
of electricity charges for the period from 17.04.2017 to 31.03.2022. The
demand was raised through a bill dated 27.07.2022. Impugning the said
bill the appellant had approached the Consumer Grievance Redressal
Forum questioning the applicability of the tariff that was applied and also
the procedure followed by the board while serving the demand notices on
the appellant. It was the specific case of the appellant that the bills and
demand notices did not comply with the requirements of Regulations 122
and 123 of the Kerala Electricity Supply Code, 2014. The appellant also
approached this Court through W.P.(C) No.29400 of 2022, which was
disposed by this Court with a direction to the Consumer Grievance
Redressal Forum to register a complaint filed by the appellant and with a
further direction to the Board not to disconnect the electricity supplied to
the appellant in the meanwhile. Although the appellant thereafter
2025:KER:40626
preferred a writ appeal before the Division Bench, the Division Bench only
granted the appellant the benefit of paying the demanded amounts in
installments and permitted the appellant to withdraw the complaint filed
before the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum.
3. After the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.
No.1892 of 2022, the respondent/Board again issued a bill for arrears on
22.12.2022. In a challenge to the said bill, which contained a demand for
interest as well, the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum by its final
order dated 26.10.2023 found that, as per the relevant regulations the
appellant would be liable to pay interest on the amounts due from it, from
the date of issuance of the demand notice. The date of issuance of the
demand notice was fixed as 27.07.2022. In the further appeal preferred by
the appellant before the Ombudsman also, the findings of the Consumer
Grievance Redressal Forum with regard to payment of interest were
upheld. It was therefore that the appellant approached this Court through
the W.P.(C) No.4917 of 2024.
4. The learned Single Judge who considered the matter found as
follows with regard to the contention of the appellant regarding non-
applicability of the provisions of the supply code with regard to the
charging of interest:
"....11. I have considered the submissions. Regulation 123 of
the Supply Code provides for the information to be provided
in the bill. Regulation 123 is not in respect of the liability for
payment of the bill or charging of the interest on the delayed
payment of the electricity bill by the consumer. The
Regulation 131 provides for payment of bills and interest for
2025:KER:40626
belated payments which mandates the consumer to pay to
the licensee the full amount on or before the due date
indicated in the bill and if the consumer fails to remit the bill
amount on or before the due date, the licensee would be
entitled to recover interest on the amount of the bill at the
rates specified in the schedule of miscellaneous charges as
per schedule 1 of the Supply Code.
12. Regulation 136 provides for recovery of arrears and its
limitations and as per Regulation 136, licensee is entitled to
recover arrears of charges or any other amount due from the
consumer along with interest at the rates applicable for
belated payment from the date on which such payment
become due. However, no such sum due from any consumer
on account of default payment would be recoverable after a
period of two years from the date when such sum became
first due unless the said sum has been shown as eligible for
recoverable as arrears of charges for electricity supply.
13. From the reading of the provisions of Regulation 131, it
is evident that a consumer is liable to pay interest as per the
rates indicated in schedule 1 of the Supply Code on delayed
payment of the electricity charges from the due date. The
due date for payment would be indicated in the bill itself.
Admittedly, the petitioner has not made the payment as per
the due date, but, he has made the payment as per the
Judgment passed by the Division Bench and, therefore, he is
liable to pay the interest @ 18% inasmuch as he did not pay
the amount of the bill within a period of one month from its
due date.
14. The next question which arise for consideration is that;
Whether the petitioner was served with the copy of the bill
dated 27.07.2022 or not?. The CGRF as well as the Appellate
Authority i.e. the Ombudsman have concurrently held that
the physical bills were stopped for HT/EHT consumers w.e.f.
2020 and it was only the soft copy which was sent to these
consumers. Therefore, both the authorities have not
accepted the contention of the petitioner that, it did not
receive the bill before 22.12.2022."
2025:KER:40626
5. We have heard Sri.Haridas P., the learned counsel for the
appellant. Sri.C.Joseph Antony, the learned Standing Counsel for
respondents 1, 3 to 7 and Sri.Nandagopal S.Kurup, the learned Standing
Counsel for the 2nd respondent.
6. Although the learned counsel for the appellant reiterates the
arguments made before the learned Single Judge, we find that the statutory
provisions under the Electricity Supply Code, which speak about the
payment of interest on belated payments of the electricity charges, cannot
be waived in relation to the appellant herein, merely because he was
afforded the opportunity of satisfying the demands by way of installments.
It is well settled that the payment of a demanded amount under the Act, in
installments, cannot absolve the consumer of the liability to pay the
statutory interest for the belated payments of the demanded amounts. We
therefore see no reason to interfere with the findings of the learned Single
Judge in the judgment impugned in this Writ Appeal. The writ appeal,
therefore, fails and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Sd/-
DR. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE
Sd/-
P.M.MANOJ
JUDGE
SSS
2025:KER:40626
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT IN WP(C) NO. 17613/2023 DATED
30.06.2023
Annexure 2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT IN I.A. NO. 2/2023 IN WA NO.
1892/2022 DATED 07.07.2023
Annexure 3 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE NO.
EZYMPYA DATED 22.02.2023
Annexure 4 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND OF THE 4TH
RESPONDENT DATED 18.10.2022
Annexure 5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPUTATION SHEET
PREPARED BY THE APPELLANT DATED NIL
