Bombay High Court Upholds Residential Tariff for Lawyers Using Home as Office

Bombay High Court Upholds Residential Tariff for Lawyers Using Home as Office

The court dismissed the petition challenging the consumer court's order, which had favoured the lawyer.

FPJ News ServiceUpdated: Saturday, September 16, 2023, 08:02 PM IST
article-image
Bombay High Court | File

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has ruled that only a residential electricity tariff can be levied for a lawyer's residence, even if the lawyer is using the residential space as an office.

Justice Madhav Jamdar recently upheld the order of the consumer court, which directed the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd (MSEDCL) to apply residential electricity tariffs to a lawyer, Shriniwas Odhekar, who used his residential space for his office as well.

Petition dismissed

The court dismissed the petition challenging the consumer court's order, which had favoured the lawyer.

"Admittedly, the Respondent is a professional lawyer, and the premises are situated in a residential building. The use of the premises, as per the sanctioned plan, is also residential. Therefore, there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order," noted Justice Jamdar.

In September 2012, the consumer court ruled in favour of the lawyer, relying on a 2020 commercial circular, which stated that the residential tariff category would be applicable for electricity used at low or medium voltage in premises used by professionals like lawyers, doctors, engineers, chartered accountants, etc., in furtherance of their professional activities. It also directed MSEDCL to issue a bill to the lawyer, Shriniwas Odhekar, in accordance with the residential tariff.

MSEDCL challenged the legality and validity of the consumer forum's order before the high court. Its advocates, Rahul Sinha and Anjali Shahi, contended that since the lawyer had used residential premises as his office, he should be charged a commercial tariff.

However, Odhekar’s advocates, NV Bandiwadekar and Ashwin Bandiwadekar, claimed that the premises were residential as per the sanctioned plan, even though they were "also" used as an office by him.

The high court ruled in Odhekar's favor and dismissed MSEDCL’s plea.

(To receive our E-paper on WhatsApp daily, please click here.  To receive it on Telegram, please click here. We permit sharing of the paper's PDF on WhatsApp and other social media platforms.)

RECENT STORIES

Bombay HC Grants Bail To Murder Accused Incarcerated For Over 9 Years

Bombay HC Grants Bail To Murder Accused Incarcerated For Over 9 Years

Bombay HC: 'Biological Father Can Claim Custody Of Abandoned Child'

Bombay HC: 'Biological Father Can Claim Custody Of Abandoned Child'

Jet Airways Defrauding Case: HC Directs ED To Reply To Naresh Goyal's Plea Challenging Arrest Within...

Jet Airways Defrauding Case: HC Directs ED To Reply To Naresh Goyal's Plea Challenging Arrest Within...

Bombay HC Rejects Pre-Arrest Bail for Lawyer Accused of Abetting Shiv Sena Ex-Corporator's Suicide

Bombay HC Rejects Pre-Arrest Bail for Lawyer Accused of Abetting Shiv Sena Ex-Corporator's Suicide

Mumbai: HC Grants Bail to Anwar Shaikh in MCOCA Case Due to Lack of Multiple Chargesheets

Mumbai: HC Grants Bail to Anwar Shaikh in MCOCA Case Due to Lack of Multiple Chargesheets