LOGANATHAN A/L MANNAR TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD

LOGANATHAN A/L MANNAR TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD

The High Court held that the Sessions Court judge had judicially appreciated the evidence and was not plainly wrong in finding meter tampering supplying the Defendant's premises; under Section 38(3) ESA the registered account holder is liable for loss of revenue from tampering regardless of who committed the tampering; the Plaintiff's calculation of loss based on pre-drop average usage was accepted; appeal dismissed and costs ordered.

Citation
BL-12BNCvC-25-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: LOGANATHAN A/L MANNAR; Respondent/plaintiff: TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
26 June 2024
Case Number
BL-12BNCvC-25-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Full Trial
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Meter Tampering, Loss of Revenue, Statutory Liability Under Electricity Supply Act, Calculation of Damages, Appellate Intervention Standards
Source Language
Malay/English
Electricity Law Civil Litigation Statutory Recovery Meter Tampering Loss of Revenue Statutory Liability Under Electricity Supply Act Calculation of Damages Appellate Intervention Standards

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LOGANATHAN A/L MANNAR

Appellant/defendant

TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the registered account holder is liable under Section 38(3) ESA for loss of revenue due to meter tampering
  2. 2 Whether the meter supplying the premises was tampered with and whether the meter located 300 metres away supplied the Defendant's premises
  3. 3 Whether the Defendant had care and control of the tampered meter

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held that the Sessions Court judge had judicially appreciated the evidence and was not plainly wrong in finding meter tampering supplying the Defendant's premises; under Section 38(3) ESA the registered account holder is liable for loss of revenue from tampering regardless of who committed the tampering; the Plaintiff's calculation of loss based on pre-drop average usage was accepted; appeal dismissed and costs ordered.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs to respondent RM 5,000