Amit Products (India) Ltd. v. Chief Engineer (O
& M) Circle
Citation: IV (2005) CPJ 30 (SC)
Summary
of Facts: The appellant/complainant,
Amit Products (India) Ltd. filed an application for getting electricity
connection, which was rejected by the respondent Maharashtra State Electricity
Board (MSEB). MSEB insisted on clearance of all arrears of electricity charges
payable by M/s Amar Amit Jalna Alloys Pvt. Ltd, which was the previous
consumer. The appellant company contended that they were not liable to pay the
electricity charges payable by M/s Amar Amit Jalna Alloys Pvt. Ltd. as the
company was a distinct and separate entity, which had nothing to do with M/s
Amar Amit Jalna Alloys Pvt. Ltd. However, MSEB rejected the contention and did
not provide electricity to the appellant company. Aggrieved with that the
appellant company filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court requesting
for power supply to its factory contending that it is a separate company
situated at a separate portion of the property and the insistence of the MSEB
to pay the arrears of electricity charges to be payable by M/s Amar Amit Jalna
Alloys Pvt. Ltd. and the refusal to give supply was arbitrary and violative of
Articles 14 and 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution. The appellant approached
Supreme Court contending that the directors and the shareholders of the company
were different from that of the M/s Amar Amit Jalna Alloys Pvt. Ltd., they had
nothing to do with the present company, and the whole corporate entity has been
changed.
Background
History: The Bombay High Court held that the appellant company was not an
independent entity having no concern with the previous defaulter.
Issue(s): Whether the appellant company was the same
corporate entity as M/s Amar Amit Jalna Alloys Pvt. Ltd. and liable to pay the
previous electricity charges?
Holding: The Supreme Court held that by mere changing of the members of the
Board of Directors of the company or by changing the shareholding pattern; the
company has not undergone any change.
Rationale:
The Supreme Court observed that the same company wanted the electricity
connection without making any payment towards the electricity charges payable
by the previous consumer. The matter was dealt in detail by the High Court and
it was held that the appellant company was none other than the sister concern
of M/s Amar Amit Jalna Alloys Pvt. Ltd. and was representing the same consumer
who had committed the default and that Condition 23 (b) of the Conditions of
Miscellaneous Charges for supply of electricity energy would apply to the
appellant company.
