KARNATAKA ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. D P GURUMURTHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE suit is for recovery of money due to the Electricity Board being minimum electrical energy charges during the period of agreement i. e. , between 20-10-85 to 20-10-1990 was dismissed by the trial Court on the ground that the defendant did not avail electricity. The suit is barred by limitation and there is no agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant to pay such charges.

(2.) THIS decree is assailed before this Court by the Electricity Board in the above C. R. P. There is no dispute that the defendant was given electrical energy to run 1. 00 H. P. water pump for hotel for commercial purpose, on executing an agreement dated 20-10-1985. The defendant agreed to pay the electrical charges calculated as per tariff LT. 3 (a ). He is also bound to pay electrical energy charges. During the period of agreement, irrespective of the fact whether the defendant avails electrical energy or not. In the written statement, the defendant states that he has agreed to pay minimum electrical charges during the period of agreement irrespective of the fact that whether he avails the electrical energy or not are all incorrect. When the plaintiff board itself got disconnected the electrical energy supply provided to the defendant's premises, the question of payment of minimum electrical energy charges does not arise.

(3.) IT is urged by the counsel for the petitioner that under the Electricity Regulations LT. 3 tariff schedule is applicable to the following institutions :". . . . . Applicable to power supply to Nursing Homes, Shops, Stores, Hotels, Bars, Banks, Kalyana Mantaps, Clubs, Cinemas, Restaurants, Boarding and Lodging Houses, Petrol Bunks, Service Stations, Swimming Pools, Offices, All India Radio, Microwave and T. V. Stations, Stud Farms, Computer Centres, Photographic Studios, Colour Laboratories, State and Private Guest Houses, Inspection Bungalows Travellers Bungalows, Messes, Clinics, Railway Stations, Bus Stations of K. S. R. T. C. for Commercial and Non-Industrial purposes. "he also relies on the dictum of the Supreme Court that the minimum electrical charge is payable till the contract is terminated. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that there is no agreement to pay, the suit is barred by limitation and they have violated the Rules and Regulations of the Electric Supply Act. Consequently, the dismissal is proper.