M/S Vanshika Buildtech Ltd v. New Delhi Municipal Council and Anr

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.

SEPTEMBER 29, 2016 'bs'..

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 29th September, 2016. + W.P.(C) 434/2013 M/S VANSHIKA BUILDTECH LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Ajay Jain with Mr. S. Bhardwaj & Mr. R.P. Kaushal, Advs. Versus NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Malvika Trivedi & Mr. Jitendra Kumar Tripathi, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW 1. The petition impugns the demand of the respondent New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) (respondent no.2 is the Chief Engineer (Elect.) of NDMC) of Rs.3,86,967/- towards arrears of electricity charges owed by the earlier consumer / owner of Flat No.4 (2nd Floor), Building No.3, Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi. 2. It is the case of the petitioner: (i) that the petitioner acquired Flat No.4 (2nd Floor), Building No.3, Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi in a public auction held by the Recovery Officer of the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi and a Sale Certificate with respect thereto was issued in favour of the petitioner; (ii) that the respondent NDMC issued a challan dated 3rd September, 2002 and a notice dated 4th September, 2002 requiring the petitioner to clear the electricity dues of Rs.11,82,428/- of earlier registered consumer of electricity at the said flat; (iii) that the petitioner challenged the said demand by way of W.P.(C) No.6058/2002 and vide interim order wherein, subject to the petitioner depositing Rs.8 lakhs, electricity connection at the said flat was ordered to be granted to the petitioner; (iv) that however the writ petition aforesaid was ultimately dismissed vide judgment dated 20th October, 2010; (v) that the petitioner preferred LPA No.13/2011 against the judgment aforesaid but which appeal was dismissed on 5th January, 2012; (vi) that the petitioner accordingly deposited the balance amount of Rs.3,82,428/- with the respondent NDMC and continued to enjoy the electricity connection in the aforesaid flat; (vii) that the respondent NDMC in July, 2012 for the first time raised the impugned demand of Rs.3,86,967/- alleging the same also to be due of electricity connection earlier issued in the name of M/s Surya Agroils Ltd. at the address of the said flat; (viii) that the petitioner represented thereagainst; (ix) that though the respondent NDMC did not respond to the aforesaid representation but stopped accepting the amounts of the current bills tendered by the petitioner, for the reason of the petitioner having not paid the aforesaid arrears of Rs.3,86,967/-. 3. It is the contention of the petitioner (a) that pursuant to the purchase in the year 2002 of the aforesaid flat by the petitioner, the respondent NDMC had made a demand of Rs.11,82,428/- only towards arrears of electricity charges and could not after ten years, in the year 2012, claim the sum of Rs.3,86,967/- to be also due towards arrears of electricity charges for the period prior to 2002; (b) that the demand for Rs.3,86,967/- is time barred; (c) that the demand of Rs.3,86,967/- is arbitrary, unreasonable, onerous and taking advantage of the monopolistic position enjoyed by the respondent NDMC as provider of electricity; (d) that the petitioner being the auction purchaser of the flat cannot be saddled with outstanding electricity dues of erstwhile owners of the said flat; (e) that the respondent NDMC, after claiming and receiving Rs.11,82,428/- from the petitioner towards arrears, is estopped from demanding Rs.3,86,967/- on the same account. 4. Notice of the petition was issued and vide order dated 28th January, 2013 the impugned demand stayed. The said order was made absolute on 20th January, 2014. 5. The respondent NDMC in its counter affidavit has stated (I) that the petitioner as owner of the flat cannot escape the liability for legitimate electricity dues of the said flat; (II) that the dues of Rs.3,86,967/- had inadvertently escaped attention of the respondent NDMC while claiming the dues of Rs.11,82,428/- and immediately after this fact came to