Whether proceedings under Sec 154 of Electricity Act before special court for fixing civil liability needs payment of court fee as a civil case?

In any case, the complaint filed by the petitioner before the Special Court cannot be construed as a 'plaint' by any logical construction of the document. A bare perusal of this document, styled as a complaint Under Section 135 r/w Section 151 of Electricity Act would show that the main prayer made by the complainant/petitioner was to summon, try and punish the respondents/accused persons on the ground that they had committed theft of electricity and had thereby committed offences punishable Under Section 135(1) of Electricity Act, 2003. The complaint also contains an additional prayer to the court to determine the civil liability as provided in Section 154(5) of the Act. In my view, merely because this complaint also contains a prayer for determination of civil liability that by itself does not convert it into a 'plaint'. A document cannot be said to be a criminal complaint as well as a plaint at the same time. A criminal plaint lies before a criminal court whereas the plaint lies before a civil court. The procedure prescribed in Code of Criminal Procedure for trial of a case instituted on a complaint is altogether different from the procedure prescribed in the Code of Civil Procedure, for trial of a suit instituted by filing a plaint. Therefore, this document cannot be termed as a plaint within the meaning of Article 1 of Schedule 1 of Court Fee Act.{Para 24}

31. For the reasons given in the preceding paragraphs, I am of the considered view that ad valorem court fee is not payable on the complaints filed by the petitioner before the Special Courts.

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI

Crl. M.C. 3284, 3453, 3454, 3455, 3456/2008

Decided On: 25.11.2009

BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. Vs. State N.C.T. of Delhi and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

V.K. Jain, J.

Citation: MANU/DE/3143/2009

Print Page

Whether proceedings under Sec 154 of Electricity Act before the special court for fixing civil liability need payment of court fee as a civil case?

 Section 154 of Electricity Act which prescribes the procedure and power of special court does not say that the special court, while determining civil liability u/s 154(5) of the Act would adopt the procedure prescribed in the Code of Civil Procedure for trial of suits. It does not even say that the special court, while determining civil liability u/s 154(5) of the Act shall be deemed to be a civil court. Use of the words as if it were a decree of the civil court in Section 154(5) of Electricity Act is a strong indicator of the legislative intent and clearly shows that the determination of civil liability by special court by itself will not be a “decree” passed by the civil curt and it is only by fiction of law that such a liability would be recovered as if it were a decree of civil court. Had the intention of the legislature been that the special court while dealing with a request for determination of civil liability, should adopt the procedure prescribed for trial of a civil suit, it would have stated so either expressly or by necessary implication and it would not have merely said that the amount of civil liability shall be recovered as if it were a decree of civil court. The legislature would then have said that the special court while determining such a liability would act as a civil court or that the determination made by it shall be deemed to be the decree of a civil court. {Para 22}

24. Taking into consideration the proposition of law enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Paramjeet Singh Patheja (Supra), special courts cannot be deemed to be civil court, the same having been specially set up u/s 153 of the Special Courts Act primarily for the purpose of trial of offence punishable U/ss 135 to 140 and Section 150 of Electricity Act. These special courts are not regular courts envisaged under Article 136 of the Constitution irrespective of the fact that the person who can be appointed as a Judge of a Special Court needs to be an Additional District & Sessions Judge immediately before his appointment as a Judge of a Special Court. In any case, in the absence of any specific statutory provision to this effect, a court set up primarily for the purpose of trial of the criminal offences cannot be considered to be a civil court within the meaning of Article 1 of Schedule 1 of Court Fee Act.

31. For the reasons given in the preceding paragraphs. I am of the considered view that ad valorem court fee is not payable on the complaints filed by the petitioner before the Special Courts. The view taken by the learned Judge of the Special Court is not sustainable in law and is liable to be set aside. Hence, the impugned order is hereby quashed and the Special Court is directed to proceed further in the matters without insisting upon payment of ad valorem court fee.

 High Court of Delhi

Before V.K. Jain, J.

BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. Vs State N.C.T. of Delhi & Anr.

Crl. M.C. 3284/2008 with Crl. M.C. 3454/2008, 

Decided on November 25, 2009

Citation: 2009 SCC OnLine Del 3817 : (2011) 121 DRJ 34 : AIR 2010 Del 91 : 2010 AIHC 2958 : (2010) 175 DLT 74 : (2010) 114 DRJ 193 : (2011) 1 CCR 113

Print Page