GUJARAT ELECTRICITY BOARD versus GIRDHARLAL MOTILAL AND ANR.

GUJARAT ELECTRICITY BOARD versus GIRDHARLAL MOTILAL AND ANR.

The impugned notice failed to comply with section 6(1) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 as amended by Act 32 of 1959, as it did not call upon the licensee to sell the undertaking and thus could not be used to compel the licensee to sell the undertaking. Strict compliance with the statutory requirement is mandatory.

Parties
Appellant: Gujarat Electricity Board; Respondent No. 1: Girdharlal Motilal; Respondent No. 2: Respondent No. 2
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
06 August 1968
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Gujarat High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Validity of Notice to Purchase Undertaking, Mandatory Requirements Under Electricity Act
Electricity Law Administrative Law Validity of Notice to Purchase Undertaking Mandatory Requirements Under Electricity Act

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gujarat Electricity Board

Appellant

Girdharlal Motilal

Respondent No. 1

Respondent No. 2

Respondent No. 2

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Gujarat High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the notice issued under section 6 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 as amended by Act 32 of 1959 is valid and sufficient to require the licensee to sell the undertaking

Ratio Decidendi

The impugned notice failed to comply with section 6(1) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 as amended by Act 32 of 1959, as it did not call upon the licensee to sell the undertaking and thus could not be used to compel the licensee to sell the undertaking. Strict compliance with the statutory requirement is mandatory.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.