NCLT: Suspended Directors Who are Prospective Resolution Applicants Cann’t Access Valuation Reports  ||  Supreme Court Clarifies Test For Granting Bail to Accused Added at Trial under Section 319 CrPC  ||  SC: Fresh Notification For Vijayawada ACB Police Station not Required After AP Bifurcation  ||  SC: Studying in a Government Institute Does Not Create an Automatic Right to a Government Job  ||  NCLT Mumbai: CIRP Claims Cannot Invoke the 12-Year Limitation Period For Enforcing Mortgage Rights  ||  NCLAT: Misnaming Guarantor as 'Director' in SARFAESI Notice Doesn't Void Guarantee Invocation  ||  Jharkhand HC: Mere Breach of Compromise Terms by an Accused Does Not Justify Bail Cancellation  ||  Cal HC: Banks Cannot Freeze a Company's Accounts Solely Due To ROC Labeling a 'Management Dispute'  ||  Rajasthan HC: Father’s Rape of His Daughter Transcends Ordinary Crime; Victim’s Testimony Suffices  ||  Delhi HC: Judge Who Reserved Judgment Must Deliver Verdict Despite Transfer; Successor Can't Rehear    

Supreme Court: Electricity Supply Cannot Be Disconnected For Recovery of Additional Demand - (20 Feb 2020)

ELECTRICITY

Supreme Court has held that the licensee company cannot take recourse to the coercive measure of disconnection of electricity supply, for recovery of the additional demand raised after the expiry of two years limitation period. The Court observed that the Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003 does not preclude the licensee company from raising an additional or supplementary demand after the expiry of the limitation period in the case of a mistake or bona fide error.

Tags : SUPREME COURT   ELECTRICITY SUPPLY   ADDITIONAL DEMAND  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved