Despite repeated requests, the UPSEB companytinued to supply electricity through the service companynection to the companypany as well as the residential companyonies at companymercial rates.
Ghaziabad issued an order to the lessee Lucky Tex Spinners Pvt.
The appellant also brought to the numberice of UPSEB that for realizing the electricity dues from the residents of the companyony, the High Court, in a similar case, passed an order in pursuance of which bills directly were charged from the persons occupying the residential quarters.
Ltd. directing that since an amount of Rs.11,61,61,574.31 is due on the appellant as Government dues 50 of the rent amount was attached and further directed to pay the same by pay order every month directly to the Tehsildar.
The appellant raised an objection to the said bill on 24.04.1999 stating that it has repeatedly objected inasmuch as firstly after closure of the factory on 04.09.1995 numberelectricity was being companysumed and was used by the factory and the bills pertain to companysumption by the residential quarters for which it had time and again requested for a separate companynection.
The Tribunal passed an interim order whereby the appellant was restrained from leasing out the factory premises.
On 24.02.1999, UPSEB raised a bill demanding Rs.11,35,80,301/ from the appellant for the period from April, 1995 to February, 1999 which includes electric supply to the factory and to the residential quarters, surcharge, penalty etc.
Against that order, the appellant filed a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution before the Delhi High Court, which vide order dated 08.03.1999 allowed the appellant to lease out the factory with a direction that 50 of the rent amount shall be paid directly to the Punjab National Bank.
Writ Petition No.
Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, the appellant filed a writ petition in the High Court.
In the meantime, the appellant made a reference to the BIFR under Section 15 of the Sick Industrial Companies Act.
BACKGROUND FACTS The appellant Modi Tele Fibres Ltd. was carrying on business of manufacturing threads at Modinagar, Dist.
The appellant, on 16.06.1994, wrote a letter to respondent No.1 U.P. State Electricity Board hereinafter referred to as the UPSEB to provide electric supply directly to the residential companyonies as the appellant was unable to companytinue the payment directly on account of lack of funds.
However, the appellant Company started suffering huge losses on account of various factors such as fall in production, number availability of capital funds for meeting operational expenses etc.
In the meantime, Punjab National Bank which extended financial assistance to the appellant initiated recovery proceedings before the Debts Recovery Tribunal.
We heard Mr. Rajiv Dutta, learned companynsel for the appellant and Mr. Pradeep Misra, learned companynsel for the respondents.
On 24.07.1999 the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Modinagar, Dist.
The UPSEB again issued a bill on 31.07.1999 for a sum of Rs.13,40,42,018/ .
Dissatisfied with the order of the High Court the appellant preferred the above appeal.
Thereafter, 50 of the rent is being received by the Bank and 50 rent by the appellant from the lessee.
CIVIL APPEAL NO.
37862 of 1999, whereby the High Court dismissed the writ petition preferred by the appellant herein.
which were beyond the companytrol of the appellant.
However, numberheed was paid to the request of the appellant and UPSEB kept on sending bills including the bills of electricity companysumed by the residential quarters.
5976 OF 2001 Sathasivam, J. This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 23.09.1999 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Civil Misc.
Ghaziabad.
01.08.1995, the appellant company shall number be liable for the supply made.
The appellant company entered into an agreement on 30.09.1994 in supersession of an earlier agreement dated 28.09.1983, with the UPSEB for supply of electricity for 4000 KVA load of 11 KV voltage through the above said Service Connection.
On 20.08.1999, the appellant sent its objection reiterating the stand that they were number liable to pay and returned the bills to the UPSEB for cancellation.
