{"id":180416,"date":"2010-06-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-06-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010"},"modified":"2016-12-02T05:30:33","modified_gmt":"2016-12-02T00:00:33","slug":"c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010","title":{"rendered":"C.C.Samuel vs The Kerala State Electricity … on 29 June, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
C.C.Samuel vs The Kerala State Electricity … on 29 June, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 15146 of 2010(P)\n\n\n1. C.C.SAMUEL, S\/O.CHACKO,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER,\n\n3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,\n\n4. THE TAHSILDAR (R.R.),\n\n5. THE DY. CHIEF ENGINEER,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON\n\n Dated :29\/06\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                   P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.\n             ..............................................................................\n                    W.P.(C) No. 15146 OF 2010\n                                                  &\n                             R.P.No. 415 OF 2010\n              .........................................................................\n                       Dated this the 29th June, 2010\n\n\n\n                                   J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
        The petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 15416 OF                                              2010 is<\/p>\n
challenging the correctness and sustainability of the                                        demand<\/p>\n
placed by the Electricity Board for a sum of Rs.7,83,472\/- vide<\/p>\n
Ext. P5, so as to record satisfaction under the OTS Scheme. The<\/p>\n
petitioner has also preferred R.P. 415 of 2010 before this Court<\/p>\n
with respect to the judgment passed earlier in W.P.(C) 12647 of<\/p>\n
2010, whereby the Writ Petition filed by the petitioner seeking<\/p>\n
for a direction to be issued to the first respondent to furnish<\/p>\n
details of the electricity charges in respect of the consumer No.<\/p>\n
10166 of Velanthavalam section, was finalised.<\/p>\n
      2. The sequence of events is as follows:\n<\/p>\n
      The petitioner           purchased the property in public auction<\/p>\n
from the KFC,         as per Ext.P1 in W.P.(C) 15146 of 2010, paying<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No. 15146 OF 2010 &
\nR.P.No. 415 OF 2010<\/p>\n
                               2<\/span><\/p>\n
the sale consideration, on becoming the successful bidder in the<\/p>\n
tender notified by the KFC. Ext.P1 is the sale deed        dated<\/p>\n
27.08.2008.     Subsequently, as per Ext.P2 sale deed, the<\/p>\n
petitioner conveyed the property to another person for valuable<\/p>\n
sale consideration . However, the vendee therein chose to retain<\/p>\n
a sum of Rs.7,83,472\/- without being paid to the petitioner, in<\/p>\n
view of the fact that there was some liability for the ‘defaulter’<\/p>\n
who owned the property earlier, to be cleared to the Board, in<\/p>\n
respect of the power supply provided to the unit. The case of the<\/p>\n
petitioner was that, despite approaching the authorities of the<\/p>\n
Board, proper statement of accounts was not made available,<\/p>\n
which compelled the petitioner to approach this Court by filing<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No. 12647 of 2010 with the following prayers:<\/p>\n
                \"(i)  Issue a writ of mandamus or     any\n\n           other appropriate writ commanding the        1st\n\n<\/pre>\n
           respondent to furnish the details of electricity<\/p>\n
           charges due on consumer No. 10166             of<\/p>\n
           Velanthavalam Section to the petitioner and to<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No. 15146 OF 2010 &
\nR.P.No. 415 OF 2010<\/p>\n
                                  3<\/span><\/p>\n
            receive     the arrears without insisting for<\/p>\n
            payment         through   Revenue      Recovery<\/p>\n
            proceedings ; and<\/p>\n
            (ii) to pass such other orders or reliefs as this<\/p>\n
            Hon’ble Court deems fit in the interest of<\/p>\n
            justice. ”\n<\/p>\n
After considering the limited nature of the relief prayed for, the<\/p>\n
said Writ Petition      was disposed of    by Ext.P4 judgment,<\/p>\n
whereby the first respondent was        directed to     inform the<\/p>\n
petitioner as to the balance amount due to the electricity Board<\/p>\n
within one week, on which event, the same was directed to be<\/p>\n
satisfied by the petitioner within a further period of one week;<\/p>\n
making it clear that, if any default was committed in paying the<\/p>\n
balance amount due to the Board, the respondents would be at<\/p>\n
liberty to proceed with further steps.\n<\/p>\n
      3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that<\/p>\n
pursuant to     Ext.P4 judgment, Ext.P5 proceedings     have been<\/p>\n
pursued by the second respondent,        whereby a sum of Rs.<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No. 15146 OF 2010 &
\nR.P.No. 415 OF 2010<\/p>\n
                                4<\/span><\/p>\n
783472\/- was demanded to be cleared by the petitioner, which<\/p>\n
according to the petitioner   is per se wrong and illegal.    The<\/p>\n
petitioner filed  Ext.P6 and P7 before the 3rd respondent\/the<\/p>\n
Executive Engineer and approached this Court by filing W.P.(C)<\/p>\n
No.15146 of 2010 seeking to quash Ext.P5 and for a diretion to<\/p>\n
be given to the 3rd and 5th respondents to consider Exts.P6 and<\/p>\n
P7 appeals and to finalise the same after hearing the petitioner,<\/p>\n
within a time frame.\n<\/p>\n
       4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the<\/p>\n
liability fixed in Ext.P5 is not correct or sustainable.      The<\/p>\n
learned Counsel submits that the petitioner has         also filed<\/p>\n
R.P.415 of 2010 seeking to review       Ext.P4 judgment to the<\/p>\n
limited extent that the petitioner might be reserved with the<\/p>\n
liberty to challenge the ‘quantum’ fixed by the respondents,<\/p>\n
pursuant to the judgment passed as aforesaid. The liability now<\/p>\n
sought to be fixed as per Ext.P5 is stated as not at all correct or<\/p>\n
proper, in so far as the power was disconnected in the year<\/p>\n
2002, while it was dismantled only in the year 2004 . Referriing<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No. 15146 OF 2010 &
\nR.P.No. 415 OF 2010<\/p>\n
                               5<\/span><\/p>\n
to the relevant statutory provisions, it is pointed out that, no<\/p>\n
disconnection shall be continued for more than ‘six’ months, on<\/p>\n
which event it has to be ‘dismantled’ . This being the position,<\/p>\n
the maximum liability could not be more than for a period of<\/p>\n
‘six’ months after disconnection in the year 2002. Some other<\/p>\n
grounds are also raised wth regard to the actual liability.<\/p>\n
      5. The prayers in the writ Petition and in the R.P. are<\/p>\n
vehemently   opposed by the     learned Standing Counsel, who<\/p>\n
submits that the idea and understanding of the petitioner is quite<\/p>\n
wrong and misconceived. The learned Standing Counsel further<\/p>\n
points out that the petitioner did never have a challenge with<\/p>\n
regard   to the     ‘quantum’ involved,    as    discernible from<\/p>\n
paragraph 8 of the W.P.(C) 12647 of 2010, which is extracted<\/p>\n
below:\n<\/p>\n
          “the   petitioner respectfully wishes to submit<\/p>\n
          that the 1st respondent is not justified in trying<\/p>\n
          to wriggle out from the enforcement of demand<\/p>\n
          of arrears of elelctricity charges due under<\/p>\n
          consumer No.10166 even after the successor in<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No. 15146 OF 2010 &
\nR.P.No. 415 OF 2010<\/p>\n
                                 6<\/span><\/p>\n
           interest expresses his willingness to clear the<\/p>\n
           arrears of electricity charges legitimately due<\/p>\n
           by the predecessor in interest. Aggrieverd by<\/p>\n
           the lethargic attitude of the 1st respondent in<\/p>\n
           refusing to accept the payment of arrears of<\/p>\n
           electicity charges the petitioner      is  highly<\/p>\n
           aggrieved and left with no other efficacious or<\/p>\n
           alternative remedy the petition is preferring this<\/p>\n
           Writ   Petition  under   Article   226   of   the<\/p>\n
           Constitution of India, on the following among<\/p>\n
           other…”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n<\/blockquote>\n
It is  after taking note of the specitic contention      that  the<\/p>\n
amount\/liability was never disputed, Ext.P4 judgment was passed<\/p>\n
by this Court, of course after hearing the Counsel (represented<\/p>\n
through another lawyer     at that point of time ), directing the<\/p>\n
respondents to provide a statement of accounts enabling the<\/p>\n
petitioner to clear the liability within a further period of one<\/p>\n
week . This being the position, the petitioner is not justified in<\/p>\n
challenging the ‘quantum’ , submits the learned Counsel.<\/p>\n
      6.  This     Court finds considerable    force in the said<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No. 15146 OF 2010 &
\nR.P.No. 415 OF 2010<\/p>\n
                                    7<\/span><\/p>\n
submission. This Court finds that there is absolutely no error<\/p>\n
apparent on the face of the         records, so as to  call for any<\/p>\n
interference exercising the power of review. More so, in view<\/p>\n
of the law declared by the Apex Court in Meera Bhanja vs.<\/p>\n
Nirmala Kumari Choudhury (AIR<\/a> 1995 SC 455 ), holding<\/p>\n
that the Review Petition cannot be taken as a substiutute for<\/p>\n
appeal. That apart, it is more obviouis to note that the original<\/p>\n
defaulter did never have a case with regard to the liability to be<\/p>\n
satisfied to the Board. So also, the property was notified to be<\/p>\n
sold in ‘public auction’, which does not form the subject matter of<\/p>\n
challenge in the     Writ Petition.    It is also conceded that the<\/p>\n
property was purchased by the petitioner being the successful<\/p>\n
bidder, in response to the tender notified in the year 2004.<\/p>\n
After bidding the property ‘in as is, where is condition’ and after<\/p>\n
having approached this Court by filing the W.P(C)No.12647 of<\/p>\n
2010, leading to Ext. P4 judgment, assuring and undertaking to<\/p>\n
satisfy the entire liability, it is no more open to take a ‘U’ turn<\/p>\n
and to seek to step into the shoes of the original defaulter to<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No. 15146 OF 2010 &
\nR.P.No. 415 OF 2010<\/p>\n
                                  8<\/span><\/p>\n
challenge   the correctness\/sustainability   of the liability to be<\/p>\n
cleared by the original defaulter.\n<\/p>\n
     7. In the above circumstances, this Court finds no merit<\/p>\n
either in the Writ Petition or in the R.P.. However, taking note<\/p>\n
of the persuasive submissions made by the petitioner that he<\/p>\n
may be permitted to clear the liability in a phased manner, this<\/p>\n
Court finds it fit and proper to have the liability satisfied by way<\/p>\n
of ‘four’ equal monthly installments ( since the amount was not<\/p>\n
quantified when the matter was finalised as per Ext.P4<\/p>\n
judgment), with accrued interest if any. The first installment<\/p>\n
shall be satisfied on or before 30.07.2010, to be followed by<\/p>\n
similar installments to be effected on or before the 30th of the<\/p>\n
succeeding months.       Subject to this, the recovery proceedings<\/p>\n
against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance for the time<\/p>\n
being . If any default is made in clearing the due amount as<\/p>\n
above, it will be open for the respondents to proceed with further<\/p>\n
steps for realization of the entire amount        in lump sum, by<\/p>\n
pursuing    such steps from the      stage where it stands now.<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No. 15146 OF 2010 &
\nR.P.No. 415 OF 2010<\/p>\n
                                9<\/span><\/p>\n
Interference is declined and both the Writ Petition and the Review<\/p>\n
Petition are dismissed, subject to the observations made above.<\/p>\n
                                P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,
\n                                          JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
lk<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court C.C.Samuel vs The Kerala State Electricity … on 29 June, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 15146 of 2010(P) 1. C.C.SAMUEL, S\/O.CHACKO, … Petitioner Vs 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, … Respondent 2. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, 4. THE TAHSILDAR (R.R.), 5. THE DY. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-180416","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nC.C.Samuel vs The Kerala State Electricity ... on 29 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"C.C.Samuel vs The Kerala State Electricity ... on 29 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-06-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-12-02T00:00:33+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"C.C.Samuel vs The Kerala State Electricity … on 29 June, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-06-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-12-02T00:00:33+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1467,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010\",\"name\":\"C.C.Samuel vs The Kerala State Electricity ... on 29 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-06-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-12-02T00:00:33+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"C.C.Samuel vs The Kerala State Electricity … on 29 June, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"C.C.Samuel vs The Kerala State Electricity ... on 29 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"C.C.Samuel vs The Kerala State Electricity ... on 29 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-06-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-12-02T00:00:33+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"C.C.Samuel vs The Kerala State Electricity … on 29 June, 2010","datePublished":"2010-06-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-12-02T00:00:33+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010"},"wordCount":1467,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010","name":"C.C.Samuel vs The Kerala State Electricity ... on 29 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-06-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-12-02T00:00:33+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-c-samuel-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-29-june-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"C.C.Samuel vs The Kerala State Electricity … on 29 June, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/180416","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=180416"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/180416\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=180416"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=180416"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=180416"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}