Estoppel cannot defeat a statutory duty to charge prescribed utility rates; mistaken billing does not override the law.

Estoppel cannot be used to defeat a statutory duty imposed on a public utility to charge and recover only the prescribed scheduled rates. The obligation is positive, arises from legislation enacted for public protection, and cannot be nullified by mistake, representation, acquiescence, or a purported voluntary release of the statutory right. Even where a customer acts on mistaken billing statements, the parties cannot by conduct create a position that the statute forbids. The statutory requirement to charge and receive the scheduled amount therefore remains enforceable.

---

---

Issues: Whether an estoppel could be invoked to prevent enforcement of a statutory duty requiring a public utility to charge and receive only the scheduled rates prescribed by the governing statute.

Analysis: The statute imposed a positive obligation on the utility to charge and collect the prescribed rates and on the customer to pay them. The duty arose from provisions enacted for the protection of the public and on grounds of public policy. An estoppel, being a rule of evidence operating in private disputes, cannot be used to defeat or nullify an unconditional statutory obligation or to permit the parties by mistake, representation, or acquiescence to create a state of affairs that the statute forbids. A voluntary release of the statutory right would also be ineffective, and the same result follows where the attempted reliance is on mistaken billing statements acted upon by the other party.

Conclusion: Estoppel was unavailable, and the statutory obligation to charge and recover the scheduled amount remained enforceable.

---