MOKSHA V Vs. BENGALURU ELECTRICITY SUPPLY CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has assailed the endorsement dated 04.06.2018 issued by the respondent No.3 inter alia seeking a direction to the respondent No.3 to accept the appeal dated 26.02.2018 filed by the petitioner and to consider the same in accordance with law by condoning the delay, to meet the ends of justice.

(2.) The petitioner is claiming to be the registered consumer of the respondent Electricity Company. The installation bearing RR No.S8HT-340 was serviced on 02.06.2010 under HT-2(A) tariff for industrial purpose.

(3.) The respondent No.2 has passed an order dated 22.03.2016 holding that the petitioner is liable to pay Rs.7,06,825.00 as back billing charges against which, the petitioner had approached the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (CGRF) and filed the complaint on 06.02.2017. The CGRF, by its order dated 29.01.2018, held that the petitioner has to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority as per Clause 44 of the Conditions of Supply of Electricity as per Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission (KERC) [procedure for filing appeal before the Appellate Authority] Regulations, 2004 providing liberty to approach appropriate jurisdiction within 30 days from the date of the order. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred an appeal under Sec. 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003 ('the Act' for short) before the Appellate Authority-the respondent No.3. It appears, by an order dated 17.03.2019, the corporate office of the BESCOM condoned the delay in preferring the appeal. Subsequently, the respondent No.3 addressed a letter to the petitioner to make the pre-deposit of Rs.3,53,413.00 along with the processing charges of Rs.7,068.00 for accepting the appeal. The representations were made by the petitioner requesting to extend the time for pre-depositing the amount. However, an order has been passed by the respondent No.3 rejecting the request of the petitioner to extend time to make pre-deposit on the ground that there is no provision under the Rules for extension of time. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the entire back billing charges of Rs.7,06,825.00 was deposited on 04.06.2018 before the respondent No.2.