TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the civil suit challenging the electricity board's bill and recovery proceedings was maintainable in view of the statutory review and appeal mechanism under the board's instructions; (ii) whether the consumer was entitled to instalment facility for payment of the demanded amount and consequential refund with interest if the challenge succeeded.
Issue (i): Whether the civil suit challenging the electricity board's bill and recovery proceedings was maintainable in view of the statutory review and appeal mechanism under the board's instructions.
Analysis: Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 permits civil court jurisdiction in civil matters unless it is expressly or by necessary implication barred. The board's circulars and instructions provided a structured review mechanism, with designated authorities required to consider consumer objections and decide them on merits by reasoned order. Where such an efficacious departmental remedy exists and is intended to be pursued first, the civil court's cognizance is excluded by necessary implication. The proper course for the consumer was therefore to invoke the available departmental remedy, with the possibility of further recourse under Article 226 of the Constitution of India if necessary.
Conclusion: The civil suit was not maintainable, and the challenge had to be pursued through the departmental remedy.
Issue (ii): Whether the consumer was entitled to instalment facility for payment of the demanded amount and consequential refund with interest if the challenge succeeded.
Analysis: In view of the long lapse of time and the large amount demanded, the request for instalments was treated as genuine. To balance the interests of both sides, payment in instalments was directed, while preserving the consumer's right to restitution if the departmental appeal succeeded. Refund was made subject to interest at 12% per annum from the date of deposit.
Conclusion: The consumer was granted six monthly instalments, with refund and interest if he succeeded in the departmental proceedings.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded on the question of maintainability, and the matter was left to be pursued before the competent departmental authority, with payment relief granted in instalments.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a statutory or departmental review mechanism provides a fair and efficacious remedy for disputing an electricity bill or penalty, the civil court's jurisdiction is excluded by necessary implication and the aggrieved consumer must first exhaust that alternative remedy.
TaxTMI 
