M/s.Virchow Drugs Limited v. The Andhra Pradesh Central Power Distribution company

petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the Letter No.SE/OP MD[(SAO/HT/D.No.479 dated 5.8.2009 addressed byr the second respondent to the petitioner demanding to pay Rs.15,62,7941- towards cc charges due on 6.1.1gg3 and surcharge thereon as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of principles of natural justice and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 ' ,-', :.:. ,'. i.,irii";llii r.:;it!i}{i\l and 2 not to demand any amount from the petitioner company and if any due is there to recoverihe same from the respondents 3 and 4 in the interest of justice. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2009(WPMP. NO: 26058 OF 2009) Petition uttder Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filerl in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respcndents 1 and 2 not to take any coercive steps including disconnection o{ power supply connection given to the petitioner for non-payment of the due demanded under letter No.SE/OP/IMDI(SAO/HT/D.No.479 dated 5.8.2009 addret;sed by the second respondent to petitioner pending disposal of the writ petition. Counselfor the Petitioner : SRI VIVEK CHANDRA SEKHAR S counser for the Respondents: sRr btfFs9_fllrs5ir" The Court mad,: the following: ORDER , ;. :i:::i1:'r,-:r:.: rii:.i THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAI(A WRIT PETITION No. L9982 of 2009 ORDER: This Writ Petition is f,rled to declare the letter dated

05.08.2009 issued by respondent No.2 to the petitioner demanding to pay Rs.15,62,794f - towards C.C. charges due on

06.01.1993 and surcharge thereon, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and set asid.e the same and. consequently, direct respond.ent Nos.l and 2 to not to demand zrny amount from the petitioner and if any due is there, to recover the same from respondent Nos.3 arrtd 4. :

2. Heard Sri s.vivek chandrasekhar, learned counsel for the petitioner

3. Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appeared for respondent Nos.1 and 2.

4. The petitioner, having acquired the land admeasuring Acs.2.2Og,-,rrt". in Sy.No. 639, situated at Bonthapatly Village and Gram Panchayat, Jinnaram Mandal, Medak District, through a public auction held under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951, for a sale consideration of Rs.81,O0,OOO l- arrd paid the full amount, received a registered i i 2 Sale Deec. in his favour on L0.06.2004. The said sale deed explicitly guaranteed peaceful possession and that the subject property was free of all encumbrances, charges, claims or demands whatsoever as of the sale date. Subsequently, the petitioner applied for a fresh HT power connection, dutifully paid the amourrts as directed by respondent No.2 towards development charges, s;ervice charges, and consumption deposit, and received power suipply without default. Surprisingly, five years later, respond.ent No.2 demanded Rs. 15,62,794/- onaccount of arrears owed by the previous owner i.e. M/s. Global Drugs Private Limited. Thereafter, the petitioner clarified to respondent No.2 that as per tJle clauses 3 and 5 of the said Sale Deed, the petitioner is not liable for any liabilities predating the sale, and insisted 'ihat any such dues be recovered from the third-party sellers. However, the respondents are insisting the petitioner to pay the demanded amount. Therefore, the petitioner filed the present \,i/rit Petition.

5. LeeLrned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2 filed counter affidavit stating that M/s. GlobalDrugs Private Limited defaultecl on electricity charges totalling to Rs.6,37,875/-. Despite multiple notices, dues remained unpaid and ultimately lead to disconne,ction and termination of HT service as per the terms and ,! .' :'.i: I :. 3 conditions of supply. It is stated that post-auction, respondent Nos.l and 2 issued a fresh notice to M/s. Global Drugs private Limited in June, 2oog and, upon learning of the petitioner,s acquisition, sent the impugned letter dated 05-09-2009, grounding tiability on clause 8.4 of the General Terms & conditions of Supply, which mandates sellers to clear dues before transfer and suspends new connections until such dues are settled. It is stated that the judgment of supreme court in Telangana state southern Power Distribution company Limited v. M/s srigdhaa Beveragesr confirms that electricity d.ues are statutory under the Electricity Act, 2oo3, and that DlscoMs/Licensees .' have t]le right to collect the arrears of previous owners from the' " subsequent purchasers. As the dues are statutory, not mere contiactual obligations and enforceable uia Revenue Recovery proceedings, the petitioner's claim that it is not liable is baseless. It is stated that according to respondent Nos.1 and 2, the petitioner cannot avoid liability and the supply granted to the petitioner was irregular and oversight-based, and they retain full right to recover dues uia Revenue Recovery proceedings or sale of ' lzozoy 6 scc 404 II I ,r.,,;,,i::;i,', r...,, \ t I l.'- l.: I 'i., i 4 property. 'Therefore, the writ petition is said to be misconceived and the s€me is liable to be dismissed.

6. In the light of the binding precedent laid down by the Supreme Court in M/s Srigdhaa Beverages (supra), DlscoMs,/Licensees have the right to collect the arrears of previous c,wners from the subsequent purchasers. In that view of the matter, the petitioner is tiable to pay the dues owed by M/s. Global Drugs pnivate Limited as on the date of sale/purchase transaction of subject premises, in case the dues remain uLnpaid even after the d.ate of the sale/purchase transaction. 7 - Acc.rdingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. However, the respondent-authorities shall grant reasonable time for the petitioner to clear off the dues; and in case of defaurt by the petitic'ner, the respondent-authorities are at liberty to initiate approprial:e proceedings for recovery of dues, in accordance with law. No c:osts. Mis<:ellaneous applications, if any pending, sharl stand closed. Note : That the l.A filed seeking to modify the Para No.2 of the order, dated 11-08- 2025 in W.P.No.19982 of 2009. The same is substituted and amended as per the Order, dated 17-09-2025 in l.A.No.2of ZO2S. SD/-S. MALLIKARJUNA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR the earlier order which has This Amended order shall substitute already been 't on 16-09.2025. '-- -.-.|--r--'..- ---' j- ":- '- .! -- //TRUE COPY/ SD/:S.MALLIKARJ UNA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR6 SECTION OFFICER To,

1. One CC to SRI S.VIVEK CHANDRA SEKHAR, Advocate. [OPUC] 2. One CC to SRI N.SREEDHAR REDDY, (SC FoR TSTRANSCO). IOPUCI 3. Two CD Copies. I BSK HIGH COI,'RT DATED i11l10812025 1'710912025 ) t J AMENDED ORDER WP.No.1S,982 of 2009 \ t-t -t- -(1.* binlI - t\-\L o() 0$ ftB ltltt * i I 0 DISMISSIING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOU'T COSTS : I