Summary
The Supreme Court distinguished electricity consumption liability from the obligation arising on a quantified bill. Charges become first due when billed, and Section 56(2) restricts disconnection after two years unless arrears are continuously shown. A supplementary demand correcting a bona fide billing error is not itself barred, but cannot revive an expired disconnection remedy. Other lawful recovery remedies remain distinct; an earlier order protected this respondent from recovery in the case.
Issues
- When electricity charges become first due for Section 56(2).
- Whether a later supplementary bill permits disconnection after the statutory period.
- Whether other lawful recovery remedies remain available for a billing mistake.
Provisions considered
- Section 56(1) and (2), Electricity Act, 2003Distinguished the power of disconnection and its temporal restriction from raising supplementary demands and pursuing other lawful recovery remedies. (¶¶ 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5, 6.6, 7.3, 7.4, 8, 9)
Held
- Liability arises upon consumption, but the obligation to pay quantified charges arises upon billing. Charges become first due when the licensee issues the bill, rather than merely when electricity is consumed. (¶¶ 6.1, 6.3, 6.6)
- The disconnection power is subject to the two-year restriction from first due, unless the sum is continuously shown as recoverable arrears. A supplementary bill for a bona fide mistake may be raised later, but does not permit disconnection after that restriction has already become applicable. (¶¶ 6.2, 6.5, 7.3, 7.4, 8, 9)
- Other modes of recovery are not extinguished by Section 56(2). For relief based on mistake, the Court referred to the Limitation Act principle concerning discovery, including discovery through reasonable diligence, separately from the disconnection restriction. (¶¶ 8, 9)
- An earlier order in this appeal expressly barred recovery of the additional demand from this respondent and confined the determination to questions of law. The general discussion of other remedies must be read subject to that case-specific protection. (¶ 1.9)
Result
Appeals disposed of with the stated interpretation of Section 56 and distinction between disconnection and other recovery remedies; earlier protection against recovery from this respondent remained applicable. Pending applications disposed of.