High Court Kerala High Court

Asianet Satellite … vs Kerala State Electricity Board on 28 August, 2008

Kerala High Court
Asianet Satellite … vs Kerala State Electricity Board on 28 August, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 19201 of 2009(U)


1. ASIANET SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS LTD.,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER,

3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SAJI VARGHESE

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :28/08/2008

 O R D E R
                       ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                     ================
                W.P.(C) NO. 19201 OF 2009 (U)
                =====================

           Dated this the 28th day of August, 2009

                         J U D G M E N T

Heard both sides.

2. Exts.P1 to P3 are the agreements that were entered

into between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent for drawing

cables through the electrical posts erected by the 3rd respondent.

Clause 16 of the agreement provides that the pole rental and the

security deposit shall be paid by the lessee before the 10th of

every month and Clause 17 provides for levy of interest at the

rate of 24% in case default is committed. However, a reading of

Cause 17 shows that the lessee has three months time to pay the

lease rental along with interest, in which event only, agreement

can become null and void as provided in Clause 13. By Ext.P4,

petitioner was informed that if payment is not made in time, the

agreement will be terminated.

3. Going by these documents, what is seen is that the

due date was 10/6/09, and on 11/6/09, by Ext.P5, the agreement

was terminated for non payment. It was challenging Ext.P5, the

writ petition is filed. A reading of Ext.P5 shows that the only

WPC 19201/09
:2 :

reason stated is the non payment of the dues as demanded in

Ext.P4.

4. When the case came up for admission on 9/7/09, this

Court granted stay of Ext.P5 on condition that the amount due

from the petitioner as pole rental for the year 2009-2010 as

demanded in Ext.P4 along with interest from 10/6/09 is paid

forthwith. Along with IA 10973/09, petitioner has produced

receipts evidencing payment of the amount in compliance with

the interim order. Now that the petitioner has made payment as

above, in my view, there is no reason to sustain Ext.P5 any more.

5. Therefore, I quash Ext.P5. However, it is clarified that

if any amount is due from the petitioner towards additional

security amount or other dues, it will be open to the respondents

to demand payment and if payment is made as above, it shall be

the obligation of the petitioner to clear the arrears forthwith.

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp