A division bench of Justice S M Subramaniam and Justice K Surender passed the order while allowing appeals moved by TNEB against the order dated July 25, 2022.

[15/03, 12:25] sekarreporter1: ”
News
Chennai
Videos
World
India
TOI Games
Life & Style
Entertainment
Business
Tech
Cricket
Sports
TV
Web Series
Education
Speaking Tree
Voice Of Conscience
TOI Newsletters
Health
Real Estate
Legal
Defence
Live
Trending
India LPG Cylinder ShortageHPCL Plant ShootingAgra Woman SuicideBengaluru Digital Arrest ScamChennai MurderToday weather

Questions of facts must be left to statutory forums: Madras high court
TNN / MAR 14, 2026, 23:27 IST

Comments

Chennai: A division bench of the Madras high court set aside an order of a single judge that quashed demand notices issued by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TNEB) seeking payment of monthly minimum charges from an industrial consumer.
Israel Iran War
US-Israel-Iran War News Live Updates: ‘All oil and energy infrastructure will turn to ashes,’ says Iran after US hits Kharg Island
Us Bombs Kharg Island: Trump says raid hit Iran military targets; warns on Strait shipping
‘Heart of Iran’s oil exports’: US strikes Kharg Island — why it’s a big blow to Tehran

Tired of too many ads?
Go Ad Free Now
The court held that disputes involving factual issues relating to electricity supply and billing should be addressed through the statutory grievance redress mechanism provided under the Electricity Act. A division bench of Justice S M Subramaniam and Justice K Surender passed the order while allowing appeals moved by TNEB against the order dated July 25, 2022.
The dispute arose between TNEB and Khivaraj Tech Park Pvt Ltd, an industrial consumer located in the SIDCO Industrial Estate in Guindy, Chennai.

The electricity board issued demand notices seeking payment of monthly minimum charges under Clause 31 of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission Electricity Distribution Code, stating that power supply was made ready, but the consumer failed to commence usage within the stipulated time.
According to the board, a notice dated April 28, 2007, informed the consumer that electricity supply was available and required the consumer to avail it within three months.

The board stated that a subsequent notice dated August 7, 2007, and reminder communications were also issued. As the consumer did not begin consumption, the board raised a demand of 2.18 crore towards monthly minimum charges.
The consumer challenged the demand notices before the HC, contending that the first notice informing the availability of supply was not served. Accepting this contention, the single judge earlier set aside the demand. However, the division bench observed that the dispute involved contested factual issues regarding the issuance and receipt of the notice and the readiness of the parties to commence electricity supply and consumption. Such questions, the court held, cannot be conclusively determined in ”
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/questions-of-facts-must-be-left-to-statutory-forums-madras-high-court/articleshow/129578669.cms#:~:text=News,conclusively%20determined%20in
[15/03, 12:25] Meta AI: Madras High Court ruled factual disputes—like whether TNEB’s supply notices were served—must go to statutory forums, not writ court. It restored TNEB’s ₹2.18 crore demand notice to Khivaraj Tech Park, setting aside a single-judge order.