K S E B Vs. S VIDYA PRAKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the defendants in OS No. 495 of 1996 of the Sub Court, Kozhikode, challenging the judgment and decree dated 31/03/1999, decreeing the suit. The suit was filed for a declaration that the plaintiff was entitled to be charged only at the Low Tension Tariff rates and also to declare that a bill dated 10/08/1994 issued to the plaintiff was not liable to be enforced. Permanent injunction restraining the defendants from terminating or disconnecting the electric supply connection of the plaintiff for non payment of the bill dated 10/08/1994 was also sought. The plaintiff is the respondent in the above appeal.

(2.) The respondent plaintiff is the Chairman and Managing Director of M/s. Doctor Prakashan Homoeopathic Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., Chelannur, which is a private limited company engaged in the manufacture of Homoeopathic medicines. The factory of the plaintiff is functioning from its own premises in Chelannur Panchayat having Door No. 750D. The factory was allotted a Low Tension electric connection permitting usage of 48 KW (equivalent to 57KVA) of electric energy. The plaintiff has set up two other units in the same compound, one for the production of eye drops and the other for the production of cosmetics. Though the plaintiff had applied for an enhancement in the connected load allotted, for the purpose of operating the other units, his request was not considered by the authorities. According to the plaintiff, several applications in this regard are pending with the defendants. However, the plaintiff has installed the required machinery for the production of eye drops and cosmetics in the factory premises. But, he is not able to work the factory because power has not been allotted by the first defendant - Board. According to the plaintiff, he has obtained permission for running the factory using a generator set. It is further alleged that, on several occasions, the defendants had changed the phase line, as a result of which the revolution of the plaintiff's machinery was reversed, causing break down of the machinery and injury to the plaintiff's workers. The plaintiff had issued letters claiming compensation and requesting the defendants not to let such incidents happen. The defendants being infuriated, inspected the factory premises on 20/07/1994. They noted the details of all the items of machinery available in the factory premises and came to a conclusion that the plaintiff had a connected load of 96.28 KW. On the above basis, they brought the tariff rate of the plaintiff under the High Tension category. Thereafter, they prepared a bill for an amount of Rs.75,780/- and demanded payment of the said amount. The contention of the plaintiff is that if he is charged as a Low Tension consumer, he need pay only at the rate of Rs.15/- per KW while he has been charged at the rate of Rs.85/- per KW, the High Tension tariff rate. According to him, the action of the defendants is illegal and violative of the terms of the agreement entered into between the plaintiff and the Board. Therefore, he challenged the action of the defendants by filing the suit.

(3.) The suit was contested by the appellants / defendants by filing a joint written statement. According to them, it is not on the basis of the actual consumption of energy that the tariff rate is fixed. The tariff rate is fixed on the basis of the connected load. The allotted load of the plaintiff as per agreement No. 12/86-87 is only 47.51 KW, which includes 4.20 KW as lighting load. An application made by the plaintiff for additional allotment to the extent of 30 KW was sanctioned but, the plaintiff did not avail of the same and therefore it got cancelled.