Ampa Housing Development v. The Tamilnadu Electricity

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16.07.2020 CORAM :

The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY W.P.No.14305 of 2011 and M.P.No.1 of 2011 AMPA Housing Development Pvt Ltd, Represented by its Director A.M.P.A. Valliammal Achi, New No.1, Old No.82, Nelson Manickam Road, Chennai - 600 029.

...Petitioner

v.

The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Chennai (West), Represented by The Superintending Engineer, Chennai E.D.C./West, Thirumangalam, S.S. Complex, Anna Nagar, Chennai - 600 040.

...Respondent

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records connected with the impugned letter No.SF/DFC/CEDC/W/AS/HT/D519/2011, dated 20.04.2011, issued by the respondent asking the petitioner to pay Rs.70,96,970/- towards Additional Current Consumption Deposit for th HT supply connection of the petitioner under HT SC No.1791 and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr. PL. Narayanan For Respondent : Mr. P.R. Dilip Kumar Standing Counsel

O R D E R

The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records in respect of the letter dated 20.04.2011, issued by the respondent, asking the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.70,96,970/- towards Additional Current Consumption Deposit for th HT supply connection of the petitioner under HT SC No.1791 and to quash the same. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2. When the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing, Mr.P.R.Dilip Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that subsequent to the impugned demand dated 20.04.2011, the respondent had also made demands, which included the unpaid amount in the demand dated 20.04.2011, which was also paid by the petitioner to the Electricity Board and therefore, nothing survives for adjudication in the present Writ Petition.

3. Mr.PL.Narayanan, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent may be recorded. Further, the learned counsel submitted that in view of the subsequent demands made by the respondent, the impugned demand has also become infructuous.

4. In view of the submissions made by the learned Counsel on either side, Recording the submission made by the learned Counsel for the respondent, the Writ Petition stands closed. No costs.

Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AD I)MDU //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar Rj To The Superintending Engineer, The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Chennai (West), Chennai E.D.C./West, Thirumangalam, S.S. Complex, Anna Nagar, Chennai - 600 040.

W.P.No.14305 of 2011 and M.P.No.1 of 2011 RLD(CO) KKV/05/08/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/