{"id":243522,"date":"1968-08-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1968-08-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968"},"modified":"2017-09-03T09:21:25","modified_gmt":"2017-09-03T03:51:25","slug":"gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968","title":{"rendered":"Gujarat Electricity Board vs Shantilal R. Desai on 6 August, 1968"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Gujarat Electricity Board vs Shantilal R. Desai on 6 August, 1968<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1969 AIR 239, \t\t 1969 SCR (1) 580<\/div>\n
Author: K Hegde<\/div>\n
Bench: Hegde, K.S.<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nGUJARAT ELECTRICITY BOARD\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSHANTILAL R. DESAI\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\n06\/08\/1968\n\nBENCH:\nHEGDE, K.S.\nBENCH:\nHEGDE, K.S.\nBACHAWAT, R.S.\n\nCITATION:\n 1969 AIR  239\t\t  1969 SCR  (1) 580\n CITATOR INFO :\n R\t    1975 SC  32\t (6)\n R\t    1987 SC1217\t (13)\n R\t    1990 SC 123\t (31)\n\n\nACT:\nThe  Electricity  Act  9  of  1910,  s.\t 7--The\t Electricity\n(Supply)  Act  54 of  1948, s.\t71--Compulsory\tpurchase  of\nelectricity  from  licensee   under s. 7--Steps to be  taken\nby  purchaser--Option  to  purchase  whether\thas  to\t  be\nseparately    exercised\t   apart    from    notice     under\nsection--Electricity\tBoard whether empowered under s.  71\nof 1948\t Act to make compulsory\t  purchase under s. 7.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n On  January  8,  1959 the Bombay  State  Electricity  Board\npurporting to  exercise its powers under s. 7 of the  Indian\nElectricity  Act, 1910 read   with s. 71 of the\t Electricity\n(Supply) Act, 1948 gave notice to the res--  pondent that it\nwould exercise its option of purchasing the electric  supply\nundertaking which the respondent ran under a licence, on the\nexpiry\tof   the said licenee on February 10, 1962.  On\t the\ncreation of the State of   Gujarat the appellant corpOration\nwas formed and succeeded to the rights\t and liabilities  of\nthe Bombay State Electricity Board.  The respondent    filed\na writ petition in the High Court in which he challenged the\nright\t of the appellant to purchase his undertaking.\t The\nHigh  Court came   to the conclusion that though the  notice\nissued on January 8, 1959 was a\t  valid notice under s. 7(4)\nof the Act that by itself was not sufficient to\t  compel the\nrespondent to sell his undertaking to the appellant;  before\nthe   respondent could be compelled to sell his\t undertaking\nit was necessary   for the appellant to exercise its  option\nto purchase the undertaking on the expiration of the  period\nof  licenee,  which  it had not\t done.\t  respondent's\twrit\npetition  was  therefore  allowed.  The\t appellant  came  to\nthis Court.  The questions that fell for consideration were:\n(i)  whether   the High Court's interpretation of s.  7\t was\ncorrect;  (ii) whether the appellant was empowered under  s.\n71  of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 to   exercise\t the\npowers of the local authority under s. 7.\nHELD: (i) The provisions of the sub-section of s. 7 must  be\nread  together.\t So read the section only means that  before\na  licensee can be   compelled to sell his  undertaking\t the\nauthority entitled to purchase must   elect to purchase\t the\nsame  by  exercise  of\tthe option given  to  it  under\t the\nlicence\t read with s. 7 of the Act followed by a  notice  as\nrequired  by   s. 7(4) of the Act.  In s. 7  the  expression\n'option\t  of purchasing\t an   undertaking' merely means\t the\nright  of purchasing the undertaking. The word\t'option'  is\nused   because\ttwo  courses  are  open\t to  the   concerned\nauthority  namely.  either to purchase\tthe  undertaking  or\nrenew  the licence.   Once the authority elects to  purchase\nthen  the  notice prescribed in subs.\t4  should  be  given\nbefore\tthe  period mentioned therein.\tThe  object  of\t the\nprovision  is that the licensee must know in good time\twhat\ncourse\t  authority is going to adopt.\tOtherwise  there  is\nbound to be considerable   inconvenience to the licensec  as\nwell as to the public. [584 F-H, 585   C-D]\n  There\t is  no\t good  reason  for  reading  into  s.  7   a\nrequirement  that after\t  a notice under s. 7 (4) is  issued\nthe  authority must again exercise its option\tto  purchase\non the expiration of the period of license.  The exercise of\n  option to purchase as well as electing to purchase is\t one\nintegral  process    and not two independent steps.  By\t the\nvery  act of electing to purchase the\tauthority  exercises\nits option to purchase., [585,E-F]\n581\n    In\tthe present case therefore the requirements of s.  7\nwere fully complied with by the notice issued on January  8,\n1954. [585 F-G]\n    (ii)  It  is true that before s. 71 can be\theld  to  be\nattracted  to  a  case it must be shown that  the  right  or\noption.\t to purchase the undertaking of the licensee  vested\nin  the\t State\tGovernment or a local  authority  under\t the\nprovisions  of\tthe Act.  In the present case the  right  to\npurchase  vested in the concerned authority by virtue of  s.\n7,  and it could not be said that the right accrued only  by\nvirtue of the agreement under which the licence was granted.\nThe  right  to purchase may accrue  either   because  it  is\ndirectly  conferred by s. 7 or because it is obtained  as  a\nresult\tof a contract compelled by that section.  In  either\ncase  it is a 'right obtained by the authority by virtue  of\ns. 7.  The appellant  Board  was  therefore empowered by  s.\n071 to issue the notice under s. 7. [586 F-587 A]\n    Fazilka  Electric  Supply  Co. Ltd.\t v.  The  Commr.  of\nIncome-tax, Delhi,<\/a> [1962] 3 Supp. S.C.R. 496, distinguished.\n    Okara  Electric Supply Ltd. & Anr. v. State\t of  Punjab,<\/a>\n[1962]\tS.C.R. 239. applied.\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
    CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil ,Appeal No. 2525  of
\n1966.\n<\/p>\n
    Appeal  from  the judgment and order dated\tOctober\t 30,
\n1963 of the Gujarat High Court in Special Civil\t Application
\nNo. 94 of 1962.\n<\/p>\n
    C.K.  Daphtary, Attorney-General and 1. N.\tShroff,\t for
\nthe appellant.\n<\/p>\n
    H.R. Gokhale, S.B. Vakil, Janendralal and B.R. Agarwala,
\nfor the respondent.\n<\/p>\n
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\n    Hegde  J.  The only question that falls for decision  in
\nthis appeal is whether on the basis of the notice issued  by
\nthe Bombay State Electricity Board on January 8, 1959  under
\ns. 7 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 (to be\t hereinafter
\nreferred to as the: Act) prior to its amendment in 1959, the
\nappellant can compulsorily purchase from the respondent\t his
\nconcern\t ‘The Bilimora Electric Power Supply Co.’.   In\t his
\napplication  before  the High Court under Art.\t226  of\t the
\nConstitution the respondent challenged the vires of s. 7  of
\nthe  Act.  But that contention remains to be examined.\t The
\nHigh  Court has chosen to allow the petition. solely on\t the
\nground\tthat  as  the requirements of s.  7  have  not\tbeen
\ncomplied with, the appellant cannot compel the respondent to
\nsell  the  undertaking.\t If we come to the  conclusion\tthat
\nthat  conclusion is unsustainable then the matter will\thave
\nto   go\t  back\t to  the  High\tCourt\tfor   deciding\t the
\nconstitutionality of s. 7.\n<\/p>\n
    The\t respendent  was given a licenee  on.  February\t 11,
\n1932,  under  the provisions of the Baroda  Electricity\t Act
\nSamvat\t1983  for  supplying  electricity  within  the\tarea
\nmentioned.  in\tthe  licenee.  Clause  27  of  that  licenee
\nprovided that the option of  purchase
\n582<\/span>
\ngiven  by  s.  9  of the Baroda\t Electricity  Act  shall  be
\nexercisable first on the expiration of thirty years computed
\nfrom  the commencement of the licence and thereafter on\t the
\nexpiration  of every subsequent period of ten  years  during
\nthe  subsistence  of the licence.  The manner in  which\t the
\nundertaking  should be valued is laid down in that Act.\t  On
\nthe  merger of the former Baroda State with the Province  of
\nBombay,\t the  Act as well as the Electricity  (Supply)\tAct,
\n1948  (Act  54\tof  1948)   were  made\tapplicable  to\t the
\nterritories   of  the  former  State  of  Baroda,  and\t the
\ncorresponding  Baroda Acts were repealed with\tthe   saving
\nclause that the licences issued under the repealed Act shall
\ncontinue  to  remain in force as if issued  under  the\tAct,
\nuntil  the expiration of the period of those  licences.\t  In
\nexercise of the powers conferred by s. 5 of the\t Electricity
\nSupply\tAct, 1948 the Government of Bombay  constituted\t the
\nBombay\tState  Electricity Board on January  31,  1945.\t  On
\nJanuary 8, 1959 that Board issued to the respondent a notice
\nunder  s.  7 of the Act.  That notice is important  for\t our
\npresent\t purpose.  Hence we shall quote\t       the  relevant
\nportion thereof.  It runs thus:\n<\/p>\n
\t\t “In exercise of the powers conferred on the
\n\t      Bombay   State Electricity Board by virtue  of
\n\t      s. 71 of the Electri  city (Supply) Act,\t1948
\n\t      read  with s. 7 of the Indian\t Electricity
\n\t      Act,  1910, you are hereby notified  that\t the
\n\t      Bombay State Electricity Board has decided  to
\n\t      exercise\t   and shall exercise the option  of
\n\t      purchasing your under    taking on the  expiry
\n\t      on   10-2-1962  of  the  licence\tgranted\t  to
\n\t      you   ……  The receipt of this\t notice\t may
\n\t      please be acknowledged.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     As\t a result of the Bombay Re-organization\t Act,  1960,
\nthe present Gujarat State came into existence.\tIn  exercise
\nof the powers conferred by s. 5 of the Electricity  (Supply)
\nAct.   1948  read  with\t sub-s. 4 of s.\t 68  of\t the  Bombay
\nReorganization\tAct,  1960  the\t appellant  Corporation\t was
\nconstituted  by\t the  Government of Gujarat by\tmeans  of  a
\nnotification  dated May 1, 1960. The Central  Government  by
\nthe  notification No. EL-1I-1(22)\/60 dated the\t17th   June,
\n1960 made in exercise of the powers conferred by cl. (a)  of
\nsub-s.\t(4) of s. 68 of the Bombay Reorganization Act,\t1960
\ndirected  that the appellant Corporation shall “with  effect
\nfrom  1st  May\t1960”  take  over  from\t the  Bombay   State
\nElectricity  Board all its undertakings, assets, rights\t and
\nliabilities  in the area comprised in the State of  Gujarat.
\nThe  said  notification\t was  amended  in  some\t respect  by
\nnotification  of  the Government of India dated\t October  3,
\n1960  providing therein that the amendment thereby  made  in
\nthe notification dated June 17, 1960 shall be deemed  always
\nto  have  been\tmade.  On the basis  of\t the  aforementioned
\nnotifications,\tthe  appellant\tis  claiming  the  right  to
\ncompulsorily purchase the undertaking.\n<\/p>\n
583<\/span><\/p>\n
    The respondent is contesting the right of the  appellant
\nto  compulsorily purchase his undertaking.  With a  view  to
\nforestall the appellant from taking action against him,\t the
\nrespondent an application under Art. 226 of the Constitution
\nin  the\t High  Court of Gujarat seeking\t directions  to\t the
\nappellant to forbear from compelling him to sell or  deliver
\nhis  undertaking,  refrain  the appellant  from\t ceasing  to
\nsupply\telectricity  to\t him for the  purpose  of  his\tsaid
\nundertaking  and also refrain the appellant from  preventing
\nhim from supplying electric energy in the area mentioned  in
\nhis  licence.  Some  other  incidental\treliefs\t were\talso
\nsought.\n<\/p>\n
    The\t High Court came to the conclusion that\t though\t the
\nnotice issued by the appellant on January 8, 1959 is a valid
\nnotice\tunder s. 7(4) of the Act but that by itself  is\t not
\nsufficient  to compel the respondent to sell his undertaking
\nto the appellant; before the respondent can be compelled  to
\nsell  his undertaking to the appellant it was necessary\t for
\nthe  appellant\tto  exercise  its  option  to  purchase\t the
\nundertaking on the expiration of the period of licence.\t  As
\nthe  appellant\thad failed to exercise that  option  on\t the
\nexpiration  of\tthe period of licence it cannot\t compel\t the
\nrespondent  to sell his undertaking.  On the basis of  these
\nfindings the High Court has substantially granted the relief
\nprayed for by the respondent.  The appellant challenged\t the
\ncorrectness  of\t this  conclusion.  On the  other  hand\t the
\nrespondent is supporting the judgment of the High Court\t not
\nonly  on the ground accepted by the High Court but  also  on
\nsome of the other grounds advanced on his behalf before\t the
\nHigh Court but rejected by that Court.\n<\/p>\n
    We\tshall  first take up the question whether  the\tHigh
\nCourt  was right in holding that the appellant had  to\ttake
\ntwo independent steps viz. ( 1 ) an election to purchase the
\nundertaking  followed  up by a notice to the  respondent  in
\npursuance of that election within the period mentioned in s.
\n7(4)  of the Act and (2) exercise its option to purchase  on
\nthe expiration of the period of licence and communicate\t the
\nsame to the respondent.\n<\/p>\n
    Before  addressing\tourselves  to that  question  it  is
\nnecessary to mention that the High Court’s finding that\t the
\nrights\t of   the  Shriman Sarkar,  (Baroda  Government)  to
\npurchase   the\t undertaking  under  s.\t 9  of\tthe   Baroda
\nElectricity Act had devolved on the State Government was not
\nchallenged before us.  Therefore it is not necessary for  us
\nto  trace how the rights of the\t Baroda Government  came  to
\ndevolve on the then State of Bombay.  But the respondent did
\ncontest the appellant’s claim to exercise that right.\tThat
\nquestion  we shall separately consider.\t For the present  we
\nshall proceed on the basis that the appellant is entitled to
\nexercise  the  right  of purchase conferred  on\t the  Baroda
\nGovernment  under the licence read with s. 9 of\t the  Baroda
\nElectricity
\n584<\/span>
\nAct.  We may also state at this stage that the conclusion of
\nthe  High  Court that the licence issued under s, 9  of\t the
\nBaroda\tElectricity  Act should be considered as  a  licence
\nissued under s. 7 of the Act was also not challenged  before
\nus.\n<\/p>\n
    Now we shall proceed to consider the true scope of s.  7
\nof the Act.  For our present purpose only sub-ss. 1, 2 and 4
\nof s. 7 of the Act are relevant.  They read as follows:\n<\/p>\n
\t\t    “Section  7 ( 1 ).\tWhere a license\t has
\n\t      been  granted to any person not being a  local
\n\t      authority, and the whole of the area of supply
\n\t      is  included  in the area for which  a  single
\n\t      local  authority\tis  constituted,  the  local
\n\t      authority\t shall,\t on the expiration  of\tsuch
\n\t      period, not exceeding fifty years and of every
\n\t      such  subsequent period not  exceeding  twenty
\n\t      years, as shall be specified in this behalf in
\n\t      the   license, have the option  of  purchasing
\n\t\t\t    the\t undertaking, and, ff the local\t a
\nuthority,
\n\t      with  the\t previous  sanction  of\t the   State
\n\t      Government,  elects to purchase, the  licensec
\n\t      shall  sell  the\tundertaking  to\t the   local
\n\t      authority\t on  payment  of the  value  of\t all
\n\t      lands,  buildings, works, materials and  plant
\n\t      of  the licensee suitable to, and used by\t him
\n\t      for,  the purposes of the\t undertaking,  other
\n\t      than  a  generating station  declared  by\t the
\n\t      license  not to form part of  the\t undertaking
\n\t      for  the purpose of purchase,. such  value  to
\n\t      be,   in\tcase  of  difference   or   dispute,
\n\t      determined by arbitration:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t\t    (4)\t Not less than two years’ notice  in
\n\t      writing of any election to purchase under this
\n\t      section  shall be served upon the licensee  by
\n\t      the local authority or the State Government as
\n\t      the case may be.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
    In\tour opinion sub-s. (4 ) of s. 7 is complementary  to
\nsub-as. (1) and (2) of that Section and therefore they\tmust
\nbe  read together.  On an analysis of these provisions it is
\nseen  that  before a licensec can be compelled to  sell\t his
\nundertaking,  the authority entitled to purchase must  elect
\nto  purchase the same by exercise of the option given to  it
\nunder  the licence read with s. 7 of the Act followed  by  a
\nnotice\tas  required by s. 7 (4) of the Act.  In  s.  7\t the
\nexpression  “option  of purchasing  an\tundertaking”  merely
\nmeans  the  right of purchasing the  undertaking.  The\tword
\n‘option’  is  ‘used  because two courses  are  open  to\t the
\nconcerned   authority\tnamely,\t either\t to   purchase\t the
\nundertaking or renew the licenee. Once the authority  elects
\nto  purchase then, the notice prescribed in sub-s. 4  should
\nbe  given  before the period mentioned thereto. We  are\t not
\nable  to  agree\t with  the  High  Court\t that  the   Section
\ncontemplates two stages namely (1) to elect to purchase the
\n585<\/span>
\nundertaking  at least two years before\tthe  expiration\t  of
\nthe licenee and (2 ) exercise the option to purchase at\t the
\nend  of\t the  licence period.  The  exercise  of  option  to
\npurchase  as  well as electing to purchase is  one  integral
\nprocess\t and not two independent steps.\t By the very act  of
\nelecting  to purchase the authority exercises its option  to
\npurchase.   In our opinion sub-ss. 1, 2 and  4 of s.  7\t are
\nplain and unambiguous.\tThey do not lend  them selves to any
\nsubtleties.\n<\/p>\n
In  construing a provision, all its relevant  parts   should
\nbe  considered together and their true\teffect\tascertained.
\nOne  can  easily find out the reasons behind  the  procedure
\nprescribed in s. 7.  In view of the term of the licenee read
\nwith  s.  7 (1 ) and (2 ) the concerned\t authority  has\t two
\ncourses\t open before it.  It can either decide\tto  purchase
\nthe   undertaking  or  renew  the licence on the  expiration
\nof  the\t period\t for which the\t licence  is  granted.\t The
\nlicensee must know in good time what course the authority is
\ngoing  to adopt so that he may so arrange his affairs as  to
\nCause  least  inconvenience to himself.\t Hence\tthough\t the
\npower  to  exercise  the option to purchase  arises  on\t the
\nexpiration of the period of licence as per the terms of\t the
\nlicenee,  s.  7\t lays down that if the\tauthority  wants  to
\npurchase the undertaking it must elect to do so at least two
\nyears  before the expiration of the licence and\t communicate
\nthe  same to the  licensec.  Once  the\tconcerned  authority
\nexercises  its\toption\tand communicates  the  same  to\t the
\nlicensee,  the same is binding on the authority as  well  as
\nthe licensec.  Otherwise there is bound to be\tconsiderable
\ninconvenience  both to the licensee and to the\tpublic.\t  We
\nare not able to find any good reason for reading into s. 7 a
\nrequirement that after a notice under s. 7(4) is issued\t the
\nauthority must again exercise its option to purchase on\t the
\nexpiration  of the period of licence.  It is no\t doubt\ttrue
\nthat  the right to purchase    the undertaking accrues\tonly
\nat  the\t expiration  of\t the  period  of  licenee  but\t for
\nexercising that right, the authority must make its  election
\nwithin the period prescribed in s. 7 (4) and issue a  notice
\nas  required by that sub-section.  The requirements of s.  7
\nwere fully complied with by the notice issued by the  Bombay
\nState Electricity Board on January 8, 1959.
\n  We shall. now take up the other  contention  advanced\t  by
\nMr.  H.R.  Gokhale, learned Counsel for\t the  respondent  in
\nsupport of the decision under appeal.\n<\/p>\n
    One\t of  his  contentions was  that\t whether  the  State
\nGovernment  was\t competent  to purchase the  undertaking  or
\nnot,  neither  the Bombay State Electricity  Board  nor\t the
\nappellant   was\t  competent   to   exercise   that    right.
\nHis  .argument on this question proceeds thus: Section\t7(1)
\nprior to its amendment in 1959 empowered the local authority
\nor the State Government to make the purchase
\n586<\/span>
\ncontemplated  under that Section; the Electricity  Board  is
\nnot within the contemplation of that Section; the finding of
\nthe High Court that the provisions contained in sub-ss. 1, 2
\nand 4 of s. 7 of the Act read with s. 71 of the\t Electricity
\n(Supply) Act, 1948, confers on the appellant such a power is
\nnot  correct  because the right or option  to  purchase\t the
\nundertaking  was  conferred on the State Government  or\t the
\nappropriate local authority under the licence and not  under
\nthe provisions of the Act; in other words the said right  is
\nmerely a contractual right and not a right flowing from\t the
\nprovisions  contained  in s. 7 of the Act as. held  by\tthis
\nCourt  in Fazilka Electric Supply Co., Ltd.  v.\t The  Commr.
\nof  Income Tax, Delhi<\/a>(1) and therefore the appellant  cannot
\ntake  any assistance from s. 71 of the Electricity  (Supply)
\nAct,  1948.  This contention did not commend itself  to\t the
\nHigh  Court.   We shall now proceed to examine how  far\t the
\nsame is correct.\n<\/p>\n
    Section  71\t of  the  Electricity  (Supply)\t Act,\t1948
\nprovides:\n<\/p>\n
\t\t     “Rights  and options to purchase  under
\n\t      Act  9  of    1910 to vest  in  Board.   Where
\n\t      under   the  provisions  of\tthe   Indian
\n\t      Electricty  Act, 1910 (9 of 1910),  any  right
\n\t      or  option  to purchase the undertaking  of  a
\n\t      licensec\t   vests in the State Government  or
\n\t      a\t local\tauthority such\t   right  or  option
\n\t      shall  be\t deemed\t to be\ttransferred  to\t the
\n\t      Board,  and shall be exercisable by the  Board
\n\t      in  accor-  dance with the provisions  of\t the
\n\t      said  Act\t applicable to\t   the\texercise  of
\n\t      such  right or option by the State  Government
\n\t      or a local authority, as the case may be.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Board  is defined in s. 2(2) of that Act as  meaning,  State
\nElectricity  Board  constituted under s. 5 thereof.   It  is
\ntrue that before s. 71 can be held to be attracted to a case
\nit  must be shown that the right or option to  purchase\t the
\nundertaking  of the licensec vested in the State  Government
\nor a local authority  under  the provisions of the Act.\t  It
\nis  also true that this Court had held in. Fazilka  Electric
\nSupply Company’s(x) case that from the provisions of the Act
\nread with the rules made thereunder it is manifest that\t the
\ncondition  as to the option of purchase either by the  local
\nauthority  or  by  the\tGovernment  is\tthe  result  of\t  an
\nagreement between the applicant who had applied for  licenee
\nand  the Government who granted the licenee.  In  that\tcase
\nthis  Court  was consideting whether the sale  concerned  in
\nthat  case  fell  within  the scope of s.  10(2)(7)  of\t the
\nIndian\tIncome\tTax Act or whether it’ ‘can be held  ‘to  be
\ncompulsory acquisition as contended by the assessee.  A sale
\ncompelled  by  law may also be a ‘sale’ under  the  Sale  of
\nGoods  Act.   But  that does not mean  that  the  right\t  to
\npurchase  the  undertaking does not vest  in  the  concerned
\nauthority
\n (1) [1962] 3 Supp. S.C.R. 496.\n<\/p>\n
587<\/span><\/p>\n
by virtue of s. 7.  That right may accrue either because  it
\nis directly conferred by s. 7 or because it is obtained as a
\nresult\tof a contract compelled by that Section.  In  either
\ncase it is a right obtained by the authority by virtue of s.\n<\/p>\n
7.   There  is\tno dispute that\t the  licence  granted\tmust
\nconform to the requirements of s. 7.\n<\/p>\n
    In\tOkara  Electric\t Supply Ltd. and Anr.  v.  State  of
\nPunlab(1) this Court observed that ss. 5,. 6 and 7 show that
\nin  the\t case of a licensee, specific provisions  have\tbeen
\nmade  for  the acquisition of the undertaking  in  cases  of
\nrevocation   or\t  cancellation\t of   licenses.\t  For\t the
\naforementioned\treasons we hold that appellant had  acquired
\nthe  right  to\tpurchase the  undertaking  by  the  combined
\noperation  of s. 7 of the Act and s. 71 of  the\t Electricity
\n(Supply) Act, 1948.\n<\/p>\n
    It\twas next contended on behalf of the respondent\tthat
\nby the time the licence period expired, s. 7 of the Act\t had
\nbeen  amended and s. 71 of the Electric (Supply)  Act,\t1948
\nrepealed,  no  provision  was made to  preserve\t the  rights
\nalready acquired under those provisions, hence the appellant
\nis not entitled to purchase the undertaking.  It is not\t the
\ncase of the respondent that either expressly or by necessary
\nimplication,  the new law had taken away the right  acquired
\nearlier.   That\t being so s. 6 of the  General\tClauses\t Act
\ncomes  to the aid of the appellant.  That  Section  provides
\nthat  where that Act or any Central Act or  Regulation\tmade
\nafter  the  commencement of that Act  repeals  an  enactment
\nhitherto  made\tor  hereafter  to be  made  then  unless   a
\ndifferent intention appears, the repeal shall not affect any
\nright,\t privilege,  obligation\t or    liability   acquired,
\n‘accrued  or incurred under any enactment so  repealed.\t  It
\nalso  saves  the  previous operation  of  any  enactment  so
\nrepealed or anything duly done or suffered thereunder.
\n    The right to purchase the respondent’s undertaking\tcame
\nto  vest  firsfly  in the  Bombay  State  Electricity  Board
\nsubsequently  in  the  appellant in view.  of  the   various
\nnotifications\treferred  to earlier.  That right has to  be
\nworked\ton  the\t basis of law as it stood on  the  date\t the
\nnotice under s. 7(4) of the Act was given.\n<\/p>\n
    In\tthis Court a new contention was taken on  behalf  of
\nthe  respondent\t namely that in any  case,  the\t appellant’s
\nright to purchase is conditional on the payment of the price
\nas  provided in s. 7 and hence the appellant  cannot  demand
\npossession of the undertaking without paying the price after
\nthe  same is determined according to law.   This  contention
\nhad  not been taken before the High Court.  The\t High  Court
\nmay go into this question while deciding the writ petition.
\n(1). [1962] S.C.R., 239.\n<\/p>\n
588<\/span><\/p>\n
    For the reasons mentioned earlier we allow this  appeal,
\nset  aside  the order of the High Court and remit  the\tcase
\nback  to High Court for deciding the issues that  were\tleft
\nopen.  Costs of this appeal shall be costs in the cause.\n<\/p>\n
G.C.\t\t\t\t\t  Appeal allowed.\n589<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Gujarat Electricity Board vs Shantilal R. Desai on 6 August, 1968 Equivalent citations: 1969 AIR 239, 1969 SCR (1) 580 Author: K Hegde Bench: Hegde, K.S. PETITIONER: GUJARAT ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. RESPONDENT: SHANTILAL R. DESAI DATE OF JUDGMENT: 06\/08\/1968 BENCH: HEGDE, K.S. BENCH: HEGDE, K.S. BACHAWAT, R.S. CITATION: 1969 AIR 239 […]<\/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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-243522","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nGujarat Electricity Board vs Shantilal R. Desai on 6 August, 1968 - 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\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Gujarat Electricity Board vs Shantilal R. Desai on 6 August, 1968 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968\" \/>\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=\"1968-08-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-09-03T03:51:25+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=\"19 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Gujarat Electricity Board vs Shantilal R. Desai on 6 August, 1968\",\"datePublished\":\"1968-08-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-03T03:51:25+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968\"},\"wordCount\":3097,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968\",\"name\":\"Gujarat Electricity Board vs Shantilal R. Desai on 6 August, 1968 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1968-08-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-03T03:51:25+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Gujarat Electricity Board vs Shantilal R. Desai on 6 August, 1968\"}]},{\"@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":"Gujarat Electricity Board vs Shantilal R. Desai on 6 August, 1968 - 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\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Gujarat Electricity Board vs Shantilal R. Desai on 6 August, 1968 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1968-08-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-09-03T03:51:25+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":"19 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Gujarat Electricity Board vs Shantilal R. Desai on 6 August, 1968","datePublished":"1968-08-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-03T03:51:25+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968"},"wordCount":3097,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968","name":"Gujarat Electricity Board vs Shantilal R. Desai on 6 August, 1968 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1968-08-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-03T03:51:25+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-electricity-board-vs-shantilal-r-desai-on-6-august-1968#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Gujarat Electricity Board vs Shantilal R. Desai on 6 August, 1968"}]},{"@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\/243522","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=243522"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/243522\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=243522"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=243522"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=243522"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}