Case ID |
36937d3b-dfeb-4df8-9ae2-53bb83cfd53a |
Body |
View case body. Login to View |
Case Number |
C.R. No. 1610 of 2015 |
Decision Date |
Feb 22, 2018 |
Hearing Date |
|
Decision |
The Civil Revision was dismissed due to the petitioners' failure to provide a timely appeal, which was filed three days beyond the limitation period. The Court emphasized the importance of adhering to the law of limitation to prevent interminable litigation. The audit note in question was deemed non-binding on consumers, and the petitioners were unable to demonstrate that they had given the respondents a fair opportunity to contest the disputed energy consumption bill. As a result, the Court found no grounds to interfere with the lower courts' decisions, which had ruled in favor of the respondents. |
Summary |
This case revolves around the cancellation of an energy consumption bill based on an audit objection by FESCO Ltd. The Lahore High Court addressed the issue of whether the consumers were given adequate opportunity to respond to the audit findings. The court highlighted that the audit note was not binding and that consumers should not be held accountable for departmental errors. The decision underscores the necessity for utility companies to adhere to procedural fairness, particularly when making demands for payment. It also reiterates the importance of adhering to statutory limitations in legal proceedings. The ruling is significant in maintaining consumer rights against arbitrary demands by utility providers, setting a precedent for similar cases. The judgment aims to prevent utility companies from making unlawful demands without due process, promoting a fair and just legal framework in consumer protection. |
Court |
Lahore High Court
|
Entities Involved |
Not available
|
Judges |
CH. MUHAMMAD MASOOD JAHANGIR
|
Lawyers |
Mehr Shahid Mehmood,
Mr. Muhammad Imran Bhatti
|
Petitioners |
FESCO LTD. THROUGH ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE, FAISALABAD AND 3 OTHERS
|
Respondents |
SARDAR TARIQ SAGHIR (DECEASED) THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS
|
Citations |
2019 SLD 2241,
2019 PLJ 68
|
Other Citations |
1999 CLC 1591,
2002 CLC 1039,
1988 CLC 501
|
Laws Involved |
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
|
Sections |
115
|