Madhya Pradesh High Court

Amit Industries Thr. Its ... vs M P M K V V Co. Ltd. on 25 March, 2021

Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia

     THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 1
                      WP 5664 of 2021
   Amit Industries through its Proprietor Deepak Jain vs.
              MPMKVV Co. Ltd. and Ors.

Gwalior, Dated :25/03/2021

      Shri HK Shukla, Counsel for the petitioner.

      Shri Vivek Jain, Counsel for the respondents/ MPMKVV

Company Ltd.

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-

1. That, without any pre-notice or any outstanding dues the respondent has wrongly disconnection the petitioner electricity connection which deserves to be restored forthwith.

2. That, on account of such ill conduct of the respondent the factor of the petitioner is losing their manufacturing capacity thus a suitable cost may also be imposed upon the respondent.

3. That, since the petitioner has no concerned with any other industry moreover no any other industry is situated in the lease premises therefore the petitioner has legal right to obtained uninterrupted connection.

4. That, the cost of the litigation may also be awarded.

5. Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted to the petitioner.''

It is the case of the petitioner that he is running an

Industry of manufacturing the transformers and electric goods

which are supplied to various officer of the respondent No.1. For

running the Industry, the petitioner has obtained an electricity

connection i.e. Service Connection No.2424902DDN3-60-

N2902017521, D.D. Nagar. It is submitted that the petitioner has THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 2 WP 5664 of 2021 Amit Industries through its Proprietor Deepak Jain vs. MPMKVV Co. Ltd. and Ors.

paid the entire electricity supply charges, however, in spite of

payment of electricity supply bill, the respondents have

disconnected the electricity connection of the petitioner on

04/03/2021 and in spite of repeated oral requests, no response

has been given and no reason has been assigned by the

respondents that on what ground they have disconnected the

electricity supply of the petitioner.

The respondents have filed the return and have submitted

that the petitioner has suppressed the material facts. It is

submitted that the Directors of another Company i.e. M/s.

Shreyans Trans Controls Private Limited are Deepak Jain,

Proprietor of present petitioner/Company, his father Shri Basant

Kumar Jain and Shri Amit Jain who is close relative of Deepak

Jain. The respondents have also annexed the copy of the

Company Master Data which is available on the Website of the

Ministry of Company Affairs as Annexure R1 according to

which, CIN number of the petitioner/Company M/s. Shreyanas

Trans Controls Private Limited is U31200MP2003PTC016137

and Amit Jain, Basant Kumar Jain and Deepak Kumar Jain are

the Directors/Signatories of M/s. Shreyanas Trans Controls

Private Limited from 08/10/2003 on-wards. It is submitted that THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 3 WP 5664 of 2021 Amit Industries through its Proprietor Deepak Jain vs. MPMKVV Co. Ltd. and Ors.

an amount of Rs.3,86,423/- is outstanding against M/s.

Shreyanas Trans Controls Private Limited. As per Clause 4.12 of

the MP Electricity Supply Code, the electricity supply cannot be

granted once there are dues on the connection, or dues on any

other connection of the same person. Further, as per Section 56

of the Electricity Act, 2003, electricity supply can be cut-off for

''any charge for electricity''. The said provision is not

''connection specific'', but ''person specific''. The person running

and using both the connections is one and the same, and a mere

camouflage is being set up by the father and son, and there is no

reason why the supply would be restored without satisfying the

dues on the other connection. It is submitted that M/s. Shreyanas

Trans Controls Private Limited had also filed a Writ Petition No.

7151/2021 against the electricity charges according to which an

amount of Rs.3,86,423/- is shown to have been outstanding. The

said petition has been dismissed by this Court in view of

admission made by the counsel for the petitioner/ M/s.

Shreyanas Trans Controls Private Limited that an amount of

Rs.3,86,423/- is outstanding and could not be paid because of

lock down. It is further submitted that M/s. Shreyanas Trans

Controls Private Limited had also not challenged the electricity THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 4 WP 5664 of 2021 Amit Industries through its Proprietor Deepak Jain vs. MPMKVV Co. Ltd. and Ors.

bill under Section 42(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003.

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

Clause 4.12 of the MP Electricity Supply Code reads as

under:-

4.12. If the consumer, in respect of an earlier agreement executed in his name or in the name of a firm or company with which he was associated either as a partner, director or managing director or as occupier and/or owner of the premises, has any arrears of electricity dues or other dues for the premises where the new connection is applied for and such dues are payable to the licensee, the requisition for supply may not be entertained by the licensee until the dues are paid in full. However, release of new connections shall not be refused by the Distribution Licensee in following cases:

xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx

Section 56 of the Electricity Act, 2003 reads as under:-

Section 56 (Disconnection of supply in default of payment):-(1) Where any person neglects to pay any charge for electricity or any sum other than a charge for electricity due from him to a licensee or the generating company in respect of supply, transmission or distribution or wheeling of electricity to him, the licensee or the generating company may, after giving not less than fifteen clear days' notice in writing, to such person and without prejudice to his rights to recover such charge or other sum by suit, cut off the supply of electricity and for that purpose cut or disconnect any electric supply line or other works being the property of such licensee or the generating company through which electricity may have been supplied, transmitted, distributed or wheeled and may discontinue the supply until such charge or other sum, together with any expenses incurred by him in cutting THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 5 WP 5664 of 2021 Amit Industries through its Proprietor Deepak Jain vs. MPMKVV Co. Ltd. and Ors.

off and reconnecting the supply, are paid, but no longer.

xxx xxxxx

The petitioner has filed IA No.4569/2021 for taking

additional documents on record and has contended that Deepak

Jain has already tendered his resignation from the post of

Director of M/s. Shreyanas Trans Controls Private Limited on

05/09/2020 and his resignation was also approved by Board

Resolution, dated 07/09/2020.

The petitioner has annexed a copy of registration

certificate, however, from the said registration certificate, it is

not clear as to whether the resignation of Deepak Jain from the

Board of Directors of M/s. Shreyanas Trans Controls Private

Limited was ever communicated to the competent authority or

not ? Even the details of Board of Directors have not been

mentioned in the registration certificate which has been filed

along with IA No.4569/2021. The petitioner has also not filed

any document to show that Deepak Jain has already tendered his

resignation or it was ever accepted by the Board of Directors.

The counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the

judgment passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case

of Uniscans and Sonics Ltd. Vs. MP Electricity Board and THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 6 WP 5664 of 2021 Amit Industries through its Proprietor Deepak Jain vs. MPMKVV Co. Ltd. and Ors.

Others reported in 2008(3) MPHT 555 and submitted that the

charges outstanding against the sister concern cannot be

recovered from the another Industry.

It is clear from Paragraph 12 of the judgment passed in the

case of Uniscans and Sonics Ltd. (supra) that the counsel for

the respondents had failed to point out any provision in law

relating to electricity which may be invoked for making

recovery from one Industry of the dues of its sister concern.

In the present case, it is not the case of the petitioner that

M/s.Shreyanas Trans Controls Private Limited is a sister concern

of the petitioner.

It is the case of the respondents that as per Clause 4.12 of

the MP Electricity Supply Code, electricity supply cannot be

granted once there are dues on the connection, or dues on any

other connection of the same person .Thus, it is clear that the

above-mentioned provision is a ''person specific connection''

and not 'connection specific''. The attention of Hon'ble Judge in

the case of Uniscans and Sonics Ltd. (supra) was never drawn

to Clause 4.12 of MP Electricity Supply Code. It is the case of

the respondents that notice was given to the petitioner on

11/02/2021 (Annexure R3) that an amount of Rs.3,65,975/- is THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 7 WP 5664 of 2021 Amit Industries through its Proprietor Deepak Jain vs. MPMKVV Co. Ltd. and Ors.

outstanding against M/s. Shreyanas Trans Controls Private

Limited and accordingly, in case if the said amount is not paid

within a period of fifteen days, then the Electricity Connection

No.2902017521 (present electricity connection of present

petitioner) shall be disconnected. An endorsement has been

made by one S.P. Singh on 11/02/2021 that the consumer had

refused to accept the notice and accordingly, it was affixed on

the premises.

The petitioner has filed a copy of reply dated 19/03/2021

which was allegedly submitted by him to the respondents in

which it has been fairly admitted that the notice dated

11/02/2021 (Annexure R3) was affixed by the respondents on