| Case ID |
22f23eb9-daf2-4aa1-bad3-1f102ee0dba9 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Intra-Court Appeal No.366 of 1981 |
| Decision Date |
Oct 15, 1995 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The appeal is accepted as the action of the respondents in disconnecting the electric connection of the appellant without serving any notice under section 24(1) of the Electricity Act, 1910 is of no legal authority. The court emphasized that strict compliance with the notice provisions is mandatory, and the absence of such notice deprived the appellant of the right to appeal. The court ruled that the respondents could not disconnect the electricity supply without following the due process outlined in the Act, thus protecting the rights of the consumer. |
| Summary |
The case revolves around the dispute regarding the disconnection of electricity supply to Pattoki Ice Factory due to alleged non-payment of dues amounting to Rs. 1,57,562.51. The appellants contended that following the dissolution of the partnership, their liability for the electricity consumed at a different factory should not extend to the Pattoki Ice Factory. The Lahore High Court, presided by Judges Malik Muhammad Qayyum and Raja Muhammad Sabir, highlighted the necessity for strict adherence to the provisions of the Electricity Act, particularly Section 24, which mandates the issuance of a notice prior to disconnection. The court concluded that the lack of such notice rendered the disconnection invalid and emphasized the importance of consumer rights in electricity service regulations. This case underscores the legal protections afforded to consumers and the obligations of service providers to comply with statutory requirements. Keywords: Electricity Act, consumer rights, legal compliance, electricity disconnection, Lahore High Court. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
WAPDA,
Pattoki Ice Factory
|
| Judges |
MALIK MUHAMMAD QAYYUM,
RAJA MUHAMMAD SABIR
|
| Lawyers |
A. Karim Malik,
K.M. Virk,
Malik Muhammad Nawaz
|
| Petitioners |
Pattoki Ice Factory
|
| Respondents |
others,
REVENUE OFFICER
|
| Citations |
1996 SLD 1314,
1996 CLC 1636
|
| Other Citations |
Nagpur Corporation v. N.E.L. and P. Company AIR 1958 Bom. 498,
Ata Muhammad Qureshi v. Settlement Commissioner PLD 1971 SC 61,
John Earnest Edward etc. v. Rai Jogendra Chandra Ghose Bahadur AIR 1935 Cal. 298,
Firdous Oil Mills v. WAPDA and another 1978 CLR 142
|
| Laws Involved |
Electricity Act (IX of 1910)
|
| Sections |
24
|