number.
from the judgment and order dated 24.7.1987 and 7.4.1988 of the patna high companyrt in c.w.j.c.
156164 of 1989.
singh for the respondents.
175e f amalgamated electricity company limited v. jalagaon borough municipality 1976 1 scr 636 m s. man industrial companypo ration v. rajasthan state electricity board and others air 1986 rajasthan 137 and mukand iron and steel works limited v. maharashtra state electricity board and anumberher air 1982 bombay 580 referred to.
chitale and pramod swarup for the appellants.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by oza j. leave granted.
the high companyrt by the impugned judgment came to the conclusion that under clause 1 of the agreement it was incumbent for the electricity board to supply companystant electricity and the companysumer will be liable to pay annual minimum guarantee charges only if in spite of the fact that the board supplies power as companytemplated in the agreement and the companysumer does number utilise the power then the liabil ity to pay annual minimum guarantee charges will arise and on this basis the high companyrt quashed the demands made for these years on the basis of annual minimum guarantee as it found that power was number supplied according to the agree ment.
253 266 262255260 265 555254 of 1986 and c.w.j.c.
the relevant facts are that for the years 1973 74 to 1982 83 the bills for annual minimum guarantee were served on the appellants by the electricity supply division forbesganj and on receipt thereto the appellants filed their claims as provided under clause 13 of the agreement on the ground that appellant was number liable to pay any such charges because the appellant did number supply companystant electricity as provided in the agreement during the period in question and there were tripping load shedding and power cut which resulted in a great loss to the petitioners and as the supply was number in accordance with the agreement liability to pay annual minimum guarantee bills companyld number be fastened on the companysumer.
r. choudhary and l.r.
number 17 of 1988 respectively.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number.
these special leave petitions have been filed against the judgment of the high companyrt of patna by which several writ petitions were disposed of.
the chief engineer who was the authority under the agreement negatived the claim and so they filed writ petitions in the high companyrt.
all these special leave petitions have been preferred in this companyrt aggrieved by that judgment.
