TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 461
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t No.3/State and Mr. Anand Shukla, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No.4/Bank. 2. By way of present writ appeal under Section 2 of Sub-Section (1) of the Chhattisgarh High Court (Appeal to Division Bench Act, 2006, the appellants / writ petitioners have challenged the order dated 05.12.2025 passed by learned Single Judge in WPC No.2752 of 2016 (Polybond Rock Fibre Pvt. Ltd. & Another Vs. Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited (CSPDCL) & Others), by which the writ petition filed by the writ petitioners/ appellants herein has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge. 3. Brief facts, necessary for disposal of this appeal, are that earlier Arihant Rock Wool Fibre Pvt. Ltd. Rajnandgaon (for brevity, 'Arihant') operates a plant over the land bearing Khasra No.887/1 & 888 total area 2.04 acres situated at village Bakal, Tehsil Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon. For operating the said plant, Arihant availed loan facility from the respondent No.4/ Bank. However, on account of default committed by Arihant in repaying the loan amount, the respondent No.4 after following the due process of law as enumerated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....360;ी है, जो है") clause cannot be determined in isolation and that the facts of each case, together with the precise terminology of the auction conditions, must be examined to arrive at an equitable conclusion. It is submitted that in the present case, the auction notice issued by the Bank of India expressly stated that although the purchaser would bear liabilities attached to the property, no encumbrance or liability was presently known to the Bank ("वर्तमान में कोई भी भार ज्ञात नहीं है"). Acting upon this categorical representation, the appellants participated in the auction, purchased the property and thereafter applied for a fresh electricity connection. He further submitted that once the secured creditor represented that no known liability existed, the respondents cannot subsequently compel the appellants to discharge undisclosed electricity dues of the previous consumer. The learned Single Judge failed to examine the auction conditions in their entirety as mandat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tracts are amenable to judicial scrutiny. In the facts of the present case, compelling a bona fide auction purchaser to satisfy the contractual liabilities of a previous consumer, despite the Bank's representation that no known encumbrance existed and despite the statutory limitation contained in Clause 10.19 of the Supply Code, is manifestly arbitrary, inequitable and contrary to the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. He lastly submitted that the impugned judgment, having overlooked these vital aspects, calls for interference, and the appellants are entitled to a declaration that they are not liable to discharge the electricity dues of the previous consumer and that a fresh electricity connection ought to be granted without insisting upon payment of such arrears. 7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2/ CSERC submitted that the learned Single Judge has rightly applied the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K.C. Ninan (supra). She further submitted that the appellants' reliance on paragraph 148 is misplaced, as the said paragraph only requires the Court to consider the facts and the terms of the auction sale. In the present....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... construed as a warranty or assurance that no statutory dues were recoverable by any other authority. The Bank is neither the authority maintaining records of electricity dues nor is it competent to certify the absence of such dues. It is further submitted that the Bank has no role in the dispute relating to recovery of electricity dues by the Distribution Company. The auction sale was conducted on an "as is where is, as is what is and whatever there is" basis, and the rights and liabilities of the appellants vis-à-vis the Electricity Distribution Company are governed by the applicable statutory provisions and the terms of supply. The Bank neither demanded nor recovered any electricity dues from the appellants and, therefore, no cause of action survives against the Bank. Accordingly, the appeal, insofar as it concerns the Bank, deserves to be dismissed. 9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the impugned order and the materials available on record. 10. The principal issue which arises for consideration in the present appeal is whether the appellants, who have purchased the property of the erstwhile consumer in an auction conducted by the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onditions of supply framed under the Electricity Act, 2003, as well as the specific terms governing the auction sale. Paragraph 148 merely reiterates that the effect of an "as is where is" clause must be gathered from the auction conditions and surrounding facts; it does not lay down that an auction purchaser is automatically absolved of all liabilities merely because the property has been sold on such terms. 14. In the present case, the auction notice issued by the respondent-Bank specifically stipulated in unequivocal terms that " उक्त संपत्तियों पर सभी देयताओं का भार क्रेता पर होगा।" 15. The above condition expressly informed every intending purchaser that all liabilities attached to the property would be borne by the successful bidder. The appellants participated in the auction with full knowledge of the said condition. Merely because the auction notice further mentioned that "no encumbrance was presently known t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n as recoverable. The said clause regulates the mode and manner of recovery of electricity charges from the consumer and cannot be interpreted to mean that the liability itself stands extinguished after two years. The appellants have not placed any material on record to establish that the statutory conditions governing release of a fresh electricity connection prohibit the Distribution Company from insisting upon clearance of outstanding dues before sanctioning supply. Moreover, the issue involved in the present case is not recovery through coercive proceedings but insistence upon compliance with the statutory conditions governing release of a fresh electricity connection. 19. Equally untenable is the submission founded upon the doctrine of contracts of adhesion as explained in LIC of India v. Consumer Education & Research Centre, (1995) 5 SCC 482. The requirement of payment of outstanding dues before release of a fresh electricity connection is not merely a contractual stipulation inserted by the Distribution Company at its own discretion. Such conditions emanate from statutory regulations framed under the Electricity Act, 2003 and possess statutory force. A statutory condition....