ANDHRA PRADESH STACE ELECTRICTY BOARD Vs. CANTONMENT BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant which is the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board represented by its Chairman, is the appellant in the second appeal. The respondent, the Contonment Board, Secunderabad, represented by Its Executive Officer, filed the suit for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant-Electricity Board and its subordinates from disconnecting the supply of electricity to it The trial court dismissed the suit. In the appeal filed by the plaintiff-Contonment Board, the first appellate court allowed the appeal and consequently decreed the suit as prayed for with costs throughout. Hence this second appeal by the defendant-Electricity Board.

(2.) The facts of the case may be stated thus : The plaintiff Contonment Board draws energy from the defendant-Electricity Board for lighting the contonment area. The plaintiff also obtained the time switches from the defendant. While so, the defendant issued a notice of demand on 25-4-1968 for payment of rent for the time switches at the rate of Rs. 4/- per switch per month for the period from 1-3-1963 to 30-9-1967. The total amount demanded was Rs. 9, 814/- The plaintiff paid a sum of Rs. 5.211-20 ps and pleaded that the demand for the remaining amount of Rs. 4. 612-80 ps. was barred by time. Thereupon the defendant in their notice dated 30-3-1969 threatened to disconnect the supply of energy if the arrears were not paid. Hence the plaintiff filed the suit for injunction to restrain the defendant from disconnecting the energy supply.

(3.) The defendant-Electricity Board resisted the suit by alleging that the plaintiff has been utilising the energy for street lighting with the time switches supplied by it for operational convenience The tariff approved in B.P.M.S. No. 515 dt : 19-11-1962 came into force in the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderbad from 1-3-1963 and as per the provision of that tariff the rent for each time switch is Rs, 4/- per month. The defendant included the rent for the time switches in regular tills from 1-10-1967 onwards and the same was paid. But by oversight the officers of the Electricity Board did not include the rent for the time switches in regular bills for the earlier period, from 1-3-1963 to 30-9-1967 and as such a demand notice was issued for Rs. 9, 824/- soon after the mistake was pointed out by the auditors on 16-10-1967. The plaintiff paid the amount for the period from 25-4-1965 to 30-9-1967 but refused to pay the amount for the earlier period on the ground that the claim was barred by time. Time runs from the date of discovery of the mistake and therefore the demand is within three years from the date of discovery i.e., the date of the audit report and the dlaintiff is therefore liable to pay that amount.