Delay condoned. Leave granted.
a) The issues which have arisen for consideration in the present Civil Appeal are:
b) What is the meaning to be ascribed to the term "first due" in Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003?
c) In the case of a wrong billing tariff having been applied on account of a mistake, when would the amount become "first due"?
d) Whether recourse to disconnection of electricity supply may be taken by the licensee company after the lapse of two years in case of a mistake?
1. The factual matrix in which the aforesaid issues have arisen for our consideration is:
1.1 In the present case, for the period July, 2009 to September, 2011, the Respondent along with other consumers were billed by the licensee company (the Appellant herein) under Tariff Code 4400 @ Rs. 1.65 per unit.
1.2 During the course of a regular audit being conducted by the Internal Audit Party, it was discovered that in 52 cases, including that of the Respondent, the bills were raised under the wrong Tariff Code 4400, instead of Tariff Code 9400, under which the prescribed tariff rate was Rs. 2.10p. per unit.
1.3 On 18.03.2014, the licensee company issued a show cause notice to various consumers, including the Respondent, raising an additional demand for consumption of electricity for the past period from July, 2009 to September, 2011. It was mentioned in the notice that the amount was payable in view of the internal audit conducted by the department.
1.4 On 25.05.2015, the licensee company raised a bill demanding payment of Rs. 29,604/- from the Respondent under Tariff Code 9400 for the period July, 2009 to September, 2011.
1.5 Aggrieved by the said demand, the Respondent filed a Consumer Complaint before the District Consumer Forum, Ajmer.
The District Forum vide Order dated 21.06.2016, allowed the Consumer Complaint, and held that the additional demand was time-barred.
1.6 Thereafter, the State Commission vide Order dated 30.05.2017, allowed the Appeal of the licensee company, and set aside the Order dated 21.06.2016 passed by the District Forum.
1.7 In the Revision Petition filed by the Respondent before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, the Order passed by the State Commission was set aside. The National Commission held that the additional demand was barred by limitation Under Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003 ("the Act").
1.8 The licensee company has filed the present Civil Appeals before this Court to challenge the final judgment dated 28.05.2018 passed by the National Commission.
1.9 This Court vide Order dated 05.03.2019 appointed Mr. Devashish Bharuka as Amicus Curiae to assist this Court on the issues raised for determination.
It was further directed that the Appellant - Corporation would not be entitled to recover the additional demand from the Respondent in this case, and only the questions of law would be determined.
3. Mr. Pun........