JUDGMENT : Under the laws and statutory prescriptions relating to supply of electricity, is the rule that no fresh supply will be granted to a premises if its earlier owner/occupier had left unpaid arrears of charges for electric consumption. However, the Kerala Electricity Supply Code, 2014, contains a limited exception to this rule, through Regulation 40(3) thereof and it is this provision which is relied upon by the petitioner in this Writ Petition, while seeking a new electric connection to be given to him by the Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB for short). 2. The petitioner, who is stated to be the Managing Partner of an industrial Unit by name, M/s Alchemy Alloys, concedes that he has been allotted a particular plot in the Industrial Development Area managed by the District Industries Centre, Idukki, which was originally allotted to another Unit called M/s.Usha Polymers Pvt. Ltd. 3. According to the petitioner, since he has now been allotted the said property afresh, the KSEB must give him a new electric connection under Regulation 40(3) of the Kerala Electricity Supply Code 2014 (Supply Code for short), because under its mandate, they are obligated to give connection to the purchaser or to the new occupier of the premises, even if the previous occupier had left arrears of charges relating to electric consumption. 4. Sri. Ziyad Rahman, the learned counsel for the petitioner, began his submissions adopting the afore narration of facts in the pleadings, by reading Regulation 40(3) of the Supply Code and asserting that the obligation to give a new connection to the petitioner is implicit upon the KSEB and therefore, that they cannot decline to do so, merely because the petitioner has not paid the demanded arrears of electricity charges left unpaid by the earlier occupier of the premises. He says that, as is clear from the said Regulation, when arrears are left by the previous occupier, the KSEB shall give connection to the new occupier, on condition that the latter deposits the arrears, excluding interest on it, with liberty being reserved to the KSEB to initiate recovery against the original consumer and that if any such recovery is fructified, then the deposit mentioned as above will be released to the new occupier. 5. 5. Sri.Ziyad Rahman thus submits that it is manifest that his client is the new occupier, who has now been allotted the premises by the KSIDC, he is entitled to the benefit of Regulation 40(3) of the Supply Code. 6. Sri. Sudheer Ganesh Kumar, the learned Standing Counsel for the KSEB, submits that the petitioner cannot claim the benefit of Regulation 40(3) of the Supply Code because the allotment of the premises in question was made in his favour by the Industries Department under an express condition that he will pay off the entire arrears of electricity charges left unpaid by M/s. Usha Polymers Pvt. Ltd., the earlier occupier. He, therefore, says that the assertions of the petitioner, built on Regulation 40(3) of the Supply Code, is an abuse of process and therefore, that this Writ Petition be dismissed. 7. Since the rival contentions of the parties are foundationalised on the manner in which Regulation 40(3) of the Supply Code is drafted, I deem it appropriate to extract it as under to enable a full reading: (3) If a purchaser or lessee or occupier of such premises requires a new connection, as the earlier connection given to the previous consumer in that premises has already been disconnected and dismantled on the ground of outstanding dues of the previous consumer, new connection shall not be denied to such purchaser or lessee or occupier of the premises provided he furnishes a deposit which shall be equal to the arrears of electricity charges and other liabilities if any, excluding interest thereon, till the licensee obtains from the appropriate legal forum an order on the recovery of arrears and other liabilities or till the licensee settles the arrears and liabilities with the previous consumer or till completion of three years whichever is less: Provided that on obtaining order from the appropriate legal forum on the recovery of such arrears of electricity charges and other liabilities, or on settlement of the arrears and liabilities by the licensee with previous consumer or on completion of three years as aforesaid, the licensee shall release the entire amount of deposit furnished by such owner or lessee or occupier of the premises, along with interest at bank rate as on the date of furnishing such deposit. 8. 8. As is ineluctable from the afore provision, it is only when a purchaser or fresh allottee seeks a new connection that the KSEB is obligated to grant the same, on condition that the said purchaser/allottee deposits the arrears without interest, so that the KSEB can then recover the same from the original allottee within a period of three years; and if such recovery becomes possible, then the deposit aforementioned will have to be returned to the purchaser. Obviously, therefore, this provision postulates three actors, namely, the new purchaser, the KSEB and the old consumer who has left electric charges and arrears unpaid. 9. Pertinently, however, in the case at hand, Sri.Ziyad Rahman concedes that the agreement between his client and the KSIDC, while the allotment of the premises was made to him, was that he will pay the entire arrears of electricity left unpaid by M/s Usha Polymers Pvt Ltd. Of course, his submission is that such 'arrears' in that agreement do not take any interest and therefore, that his client is not liable for the same. However, the issue is not whether the petitioner is liable for electricity charges alone or whether he is liable for the interest also. The vital question is whether there is any residual liability, as per the agreement between the petitioner and the KSIDC, on the original consumer, because only if such liability continues, can the KSEB proceed against the said entity under the provisions of Regulation 40(3), afore extracted. 10. From the admitted facts and pleadings on record, it is indubitable that the entire liability to pay the arrears of electric charges has been transferred by the KSIDC to the petitioner and that the fresh allotment of the premises in his name was made by the Industries Department on such basis alone. I, therefore, cannot understand how the petitioner can claim the benefit of Regulation 40(3) of the Supply Code, since it is only when he is able to establish before this Court that he is not responsible for payment of the arrears, can he claim the benefits under the said Regulation. 11. I, therefore, cannot understand how the petitioner can claim the benefit of Regulation 40(3) of the Supply Code, since it is only when he is able to establish before this Court that he is not responsible for payment of the arrears, can he claim the benefits under the said Regulation. 11. On the contrary, here is a case where the petitioner concedes to be expressly responsible for paying the entire arrears of electric charges left unpaid by the old occupier; thus clearly indicating that the original consumer has no such liability left; and consequently, Regulation 40(3) of the Supply Code cannot be of any avail to him. In the afore circumstances, I dismiss this Writ Petition holding that the petitioner is not entitled to any benefit under Regulation 40(3) of the Supply Code and that he must apply for a fresh connection from the KSEB in terms of the other applicable Statutes and Regulations; in which event, the said Authority will grant him such connection without any further delay. This writ petition is thus ordered.