U.P. ELECT. BOARD THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN AND ANR.versusM/S. TRIVENI ENGG. WORKS LTD.

A     U.P. ELECT, BOARD THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN AND ANR.
                                 v.
                  M/S. TRIVENI ENGG. WORKS LTD.

                                    APRIL 12, 1996

B                [K. RAMASWAMY AND G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.]

            Elect1icity Supply Act, 1948 :

           S.48-Revision of Tmiffi-Under an agreement between the respondent
C   indusoy and the U.P. Electricity Board, the Board revised tamffs and deleted
    LMV-1(}-He/d, on deletion of LMV-10 w.e.j: July 31, 191!6, and the respon-
    dent being an industlial unit, the respondent is liable to pay the charges for
    electiicity consumed between August 1986 and October 9, 1989 under HV-2
    rates.

D           CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 7468 of
    1996.

         From the Judgment and Order dated 4.5.95 of the Allahabad High
    Court in C.M.W.P. No. 23865 of 1990.

E           B. Sen and Pradeep Misra for the Appellants.

            Sanjeev Anand for the Respondents.

            The following Order of the Court was delivered :

F           Leave granted.

            We, have heard learned counsel for the parties.

          This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment and order
    dated May 4, 1995 made in W.P. No. 23865/90 by the High Court of
G   Allahabad. The admitted facts are that the respondents had entered into
    an agreement for the supply of electrical energy, initially of 104 KW. The
    load was mixed type load for industrial purpose as well as for light and
    fans of the factory under clause (8) of the agreement. Section 48 of the
    Electrical Supply Act, 1948 empowers the Board to revise the tariffs from
H   time to time. One of the conditions under clause (8) read as under :
                                       290
             U.P. ELECT. BD. v. TRIVENI ENGG. WORKS LTD.                   291

          "8(a) The Consumer shall pay for the supply of electric energy at       A
          the rates enforced by the Supplier from time to time as may be
          applicable to the Consumer.

          Provided that in the event of alternative rates being available for
          that category of load, the consumer shall have the option to choose
          the tariff that suit him best.                                          B

          (b) The rate Schedule applicable to the consumer at the time of
          execution of this agreement is annexed hereto as Annexure.

          (c) The rate schedule above mentioned met at the discretion of          C
          the Supplier, be revised by the Supplier from time to time and in
          the case of revision the rate schedule so revised shall be applicable
          to the consumer from such date as may be general or special order
          be notified by the Supplier."

      Under clause (8) read writ Section 48, the appellant-Board has the D
power to revise the tariffs from time to time for supply of electrical energy.
In exercise thereof, on July 13, 1986 the Board revised the tariffs and
deleted LMV-10 and substituted various items for the deleted tariffs. As
far LMV-10 is concerned, there is no corresponding substitution under the
amended tariffs. By operation of rate schedule, for HV-2, "large and heavy E
powcr 1, it is provided for any other power consumption to enter under any
      1



other rate "schedule" HV-2 becomes applicable.

      It is an admitted position that on October 10, 1989, at the request of
the respondent, 104 KW of electrical energy was increased to 404 KW and
a separate contract was entered into for payment of rates under the tariff. F
The above revised rates would apply from that date. The only dispute is
with reference to the rate applicable for the electricity supplied between
August 1, 1986 to October 9, 1989. It is the contention of the respondent-
industry that in view of the deletion of LMV-10, the rate of schedule must
be LMV-2. As a consequence, the appellant has no power to charge the
respondent at the HV-2 rate. That contention found favour with the High G
Court. The High Court came to the conclusion that the agreement had
become effective from October 10, 1989, the respondent had no right to
charge for the previous supply. It is not covered under the agreement. The
High Court was not right in reaching the conclusion. It is seen that under
the contract entered into by the respondent, they are liable to charge H
    292                   SUPREMECOURTREPORTS (1996] SUPP. lS.C.R.

A   consumption of the electrical energy as per the rates provided in LMV-10.
    On its deletion w.e.f. July 31, 1986 for the electricity consumed by the
    respondent, one of the rates applicable should be as provided in the tariff.
    It is seen that LMV-2 is only for commercial establishments. Since the
    respondent is an industrial unit, obviously HV-2 would stand applicable
    only. Since there is no express contract between the parties, the residuary
B
    power in HV-2 stands attracted. Accordingly the respondent is liable to
    pay the charges for the electricity consumed between August 1, 1986 and
    October 9, 1989 under HV-2 Rates. We are informed that from February,
    1986 till July 31, 1986, the bill also has been given for the payment of the
    charges under HV-2 rates. This is obviously incorrect. They are liable to
c   charge only at the previous rates from the period from February 1986 till
    July 31, 1986, the date on which the revision was effected. The appellant
    is, therefore, directed to revise the bill accordingly and make a fresh
    demand for payment. On demand so made, the respondent is at liberty to
    pay the same within a period of six months from the date of the receipt of
D   the demand.

           The appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.

    R.P.                                                      Appeal Allowed.