https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190965 Under section 24 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, "due" was construed broadly to include sums owed for electricity supply even if part of the claim would be time-barred in a civil suit, and refusal to pay such a demand could amount to "neglect" justifying discontinuance. The consumer's objection was held not to be a bona fide dispute because the facts underlying the revised meter calculation had been explained and were not genuinely contested, so section 24 could be invoked. The trial court's refusal to permit late constitutional amendments was upheld as a proper exercise of discretion. en-us Mon, 13 Feb 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Mar 2017 15:20:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190965 Under section 24 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, "due" was construed broadly to include sums owed for electricity supply even if part of the claim would be time-barred in a civil suit, and refusal to pay such a demand could amount to "neglect" justifying discontinuance. The consumer's objection was held not to be a bona fide dispute because the facts underlying the revised meter calculation had been explained and were not genuinely contested, so section 24 could be invoked. The trial court's refusal to permit late constitutional amendments was upheld as a proper exercise of discretion. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 13 Feb 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190965