IN THE HON’BLE COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE – I

KALYAN,

AT –KALYAN

(Special Electricity Court, Kalyan)

(Criminal Misc. Application No. 153 of 2022.)

Shri Kishanlal Nandlal Vasita ….Applicant

V / S.

The Additional Executive Engineer

MSEDCL, Ulhasnagar 4 Sub-Division. …. Respondent

Say on behalf of the Respondent in

Criminal Mis. Application as well as
Interim Relief Application filed by the
Applicant.

THE RESPONDENT MOST RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT AS

UNDER:-

1) At the very outset, the respondent denies all and

singular allegations, statements and contentions made in

1
the application U/S. 154(5) of the Electricity Act 2003 as

well as in the Interim Relief Application filed by Applicant.

Further nothing shall be deemed to have been admitted by

the respondent merely because the same may not have

been denied specifically.

2) The Application filed by the Applicant purported to be

for fixation of civil liability is neither maintainable in law

nor on facts. There is no cause of action arose to file

present application and the cause of action alleged is false

and fabricated.

3) It is submitted that the Theft Assessment Bill issued

to applicant is proper, legal and calculated accurately. The

theft assessment calculations prepared by applicant are

hypothetical, wrong and baseless. These calculations are

wrong and the Application under reply has been filed just

to linger the payment of Theft Assessment Bill amount and

thereby to avoid the payment of the said bill as well as

current bill by taking the shelter of court proceeding.

2
4) The Applicant has not come before this court with

clean hands and that he has committed theft of electricity

and as he failed to pay or deposit the aforesaid assessed

bill amount for consumption of energy by committing theft

thereof. So also the applicant did not pay even the

compounding charges to the Opponent as per section 152

of Electricity Act 2003. The FIR registered against the

Applicant under provisions of Section 135 of Electricity

Act, 2003. Therefore, his electricity supply disconnected

and later on he is making is hue and cry. In short this

application under reply is itself sheer misuse of the process

of court and the same is required to be rejected.

5) It is submitted that for provisions of reconnection of

electricity connection is very clear that as per proviso of

Section 135 of Electricity Act,2003, “provided also that the

licensee or supplier, as the case may be, on deposit or

payment of assessed amount or electricity charges in

accordance with the provisions of this Act, shall, without

prejudice to the obligation to lodge the complaint as

referred to in the second proviso to this clause, restore the

3
supply line of electricity within forty eight hours of such

deposit or payment.

Thus, unless entire theft assessment amount is

deposited by applicant, there is no question of

restoration of electricity supply. Thus, on this ground

itself application is liable to be rejected.

6) The Applicant is bound to make entire payment of

theft assessment bill amount as per provisions of law and

till then the applicant is not entitled to get reconnection

and the Opponents are not liable to reconnect, electricity

supply.

7) The respondent respectfully submits that the

Electricity Act 2003 is a Special Act enacted by the

parliament.

The Last Proviso of section 135(1A) of the EA-2003,

which is relevant in present case is as under:-

Provided also that the licensee or supplier as the case

may be on deposit or payment of the assessed amount

of electricity charges in accordance with the provisions of

4
this Act, shall without prejudice to the obligation to lodge

the complaint as referred to in the second proviso to this

clause, restore the supply line of electricity within

forty eight hours of such deposit or payment.

8) It is submitted that the above mentioned third proviso of

Sec. 135(1A) is very specific and crystal clear that, the

supply can only restored on payment of the theft

assessment amount, the supply cannot be restored

without payment of theft assessment amount.

9) It is submitted that, there is no provision in the

Electricity Act-2003 to file Interim Relief Application for

Restoration of Power Supply before Special Court. The

Consumer has to pay 100% of the theft assessment

amount as per Sec. 135(1) A and 154(6) of the Electricity

Act-2003 for Restoration of Power Supply. Hence, it is

submitted that the interim relief application filed by the

applicant is not maintainable.

10) The Section 154 (6) of the EA-2003, which is

relevant in present case is as under:-

Sec. 154(6) “In case the civil liability so determined

finally by the special Court is less than the amount

5
deposited by the consumer or the person, the excess

amount so deposited by the consumer or the person, to the

Board or licensee or the concerned person as the case may

be shall be refunded by the Board”.

It is submitted that above section clearly envisages

that the Consumer / Applicant has to deposit the entire

civil liability as per the theft assessment bill and get the

supply restored, Thereafter, after Completion of Trail, if the

special court comes to the conclusion that the amount

deposited by the Consumer / Applicant is in excess / more

than the actual determined civil liability by court, the

special court is empowered to direct the Electricity

Distribution Company to refund the excessive amount. As

per above mentioned legal provisions, the Consumer /

Applicant has to pay the entire theft assessment

amount for restoration of power supply and apply for

the refund of excessive amount at the stage of

evidence during Trail. This is not the stage of evidence

in trial, hence, the applications filed by applicant are

premature, not maintainable and deserves to be

dismissed.

6
11) The respondent further submits that the theft

assessment bill / civil liability bill issued to the applicant is

correct, legal and proper. Above bill is legally and properly

calculated as per the provisions of E.A.2003, MERC

Regulations and Commercial Circulars issued by the

MSEDCL. The respondent further submits that the

respondent has followed entire procedure as per the

provisions of E.A.2003, MERC Regulations and

Commercial Circulars issued by the MSEDCL.

12) The respondent further submits that, if the electricity

supply is restored without paying the civil liability amount,

the respondent will have to face the financial hardship. The

FIR is filed in the present case and the police are doing

their investigation. There will be irreparable loss of the

respondent, if the electricity supply is restored without

paying the civil liability amount. The applicant will never

turn up to the matter and he will never pay the civil

liability amount, if the supply is restored without paying

the civil liability.

7
13) The applicant being fully aware of the provisions of the

E.A. 2003 deliberately filed these applications that too

without depositing the full assessed amount / civil liability.

Hence the present applications filed by applicant needs to

be dismissed by this Hon’ble Court without allowing any of

the pray of the applicant in the present applications.

14) In view of this, the application filed by applicant to

avoid the payment of theft assessment bill lacks substance

and may kindly be rejected.

At: Kalyan

Filed in court on:-

Sd./-

Respondent. Advocate for the Respondent

8
 VERIFICATION

I, Mr. Ashok Ratnapal Naarvade, Age - 51 Years,

Additional Executive Engineer of the Respondent

Company, do hereby on solemn affirmation state and

declare that whatever stated hereinabove is true and

correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Hence solemnly affirmed by me on this ______ day of

__________ 2023 at Kalyan.

Filed in court on:-

Sd./-

Respondent.

Advocate for Respondent

9
10
 IN THE HON’BLE COURT OF DISTRICT
JUDGE – I KALYAN,
AT –KALYAN
(Special Electricity Court, Kalyan)
(Criminal Misc. Application No. 153 of
2022.)
Shri Kishanlal Nandlal Vasita….Applicant
V / S.
The Additional Executive Engineer
MSEDCL, Ulhasnagar 4
Sub-Division. …. Respondent.

REPLY OF RESPONDENT ON CRI. MISC.

APPLICATION AND INTERIM RELIEF
APPLICATION

Dated this day of February 2023

MANOHAR MHASKAR
VIVEK AGARWAL
D 604, RNA Compound, Opp. P. V. Doshi
Hospital, Mira Road (E), Thane – 401107
Mob. 9820666127

11