Case Details

Citation(s)
1999 SLD 882 = 1999 CLC 1540
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 13131 of 1998, decided on 22nd June, 1999.
Presented By: Before Ali Nawaz Chowhan, J
Muhammad Nawaz for Petitioner. Muhammad Ilyas Khan for
Respondent.

SARWAR SEWING MACHINE---Petitioner

VERSUS

WAPDA---Respondent

Law: Electricity Act (IX of 1910)

Section: 24 , 26-

Electricity Act (IX of 1910)-- ----Ss. 24 & 26---Application for reduction in sanctioned load by the consumer---Reduced load would be recorded from the date on which the payment had been made persuant to the application made by customer asking for the reduction ---WAPDA should have no excuse for delaying the reduction of the load after the payment of the cost and the new test report having been submitted---Delay, if any, by WAPDA would, thus, lie at its own cost. Muhammad Nawaz for Petitioner. Muhammad Ilyas Khan for Respondent. Date of hearing: 31st May, 1999. JUDGMENT The judgments of the Courts below are at variance. The Civil Judge decreed the suit on 23-9-1989 but his decision was reversed by the learned Additional District Judge vide his judgment and decree, dated 14-2-1994. Therefore, this revision petition. There is also a writ petition between the same parties on same dispute. Both of these are being taken together for disposal through this order. The facts of the case are that the plaintiff had a sanctioned load of 191.013 K.W. under Tariff B-II. That on account of an acute slump in the market, the petitioner did not require so much of the sanctioned load. Therefore, the petitioner moved an application asking for its reduction. This application was moved on 31-7-1988. The request was for the reduction of load to 61.454 K.W This was to bring the consumption under Tariff B.I. That the reduction for the consumption was verified by the   WAPDA even through spot inspection. Thai despite closure of the factory non-consumption of electricity and the application under reference, WAPDA sent a bill of Rs.19,323 which was due on 28-9-1988. This was against fixed charges. The bill was paid under protest. Likewise the WAPDA again sent the bill against fixed charges on account of Tariff B-II for Rs.21,002. The petitioner then went to the Civil Court challenging the two bills. In the meanwhile, his application for reduction of the load was accepted and his load was reduced to 61.549 LW w.e.f. 1-7-1989. This application was, dated 14-6-1989, which became effective on 1-7-1989. The suit was decreed. The matter was next taken up by WAPDA before the learned…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register