Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
FA/2587/1999 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
FIRST
APPEAL No. 2587 of 1999
=================================================
AHMEDABAD
ELECTRICITY CO.LTD - Appellant(s)
Versus
JAWAHAR
JAYANTILAL SANGANI - Defendant(s)
=================================================
Appearance :
MR
KB PUJARA for Appellant(s) : 1,
MR ANAND L SHARMA for Defendant(s)
: 1,
=================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE
Date
: 05/09/2011
ORAL
ORDER
Learned
advocate for the appellant submits that in the opinion of the learned
Judge, the appellant – defendant was not obliged to serve any
notice to the consumer prior to disconnecting the electricity supply
when prima facie evidence of theft of energy or malpractice is found
by the competent authority of the defendant company. The learned
Judge, however, examined the question as to whether the plaintiff has
committed theft of energy or malpractice and finally held that
section 26 of the Indian Electricity Act, 2010 was applicable and
failure to do so on the part of the electricity company would entitle
the plaintiff to decree in his favour, as prayed for.
Learned
advocate for the appellant relying on the decisions of the Apex Court
in the cases of [i] Bombay Electric Supply and Transport Undertaking
v. Laffans (I) Pvt. Ltd. [AIR 2005 SC 2486] and [ii] Sub-Divisional
Officer (P), UHBVNL v. Dharam Pal [AIR 2007 SC 1214] and submits that
in cases of theft and malpractice, applicability of section 26 or
even provision of 26(6) of the Electricity Act, 1910 would not be
applicable.
However,
learned advocate for the respondent is not present.
Hence,
post the matter on 15.09.2011.
[Anant
S. Dave, J.]
*pvv
Top