Category: Electricity Act

Power Purchase Agreement – the finding of the CERC and the learned APTEL is to the effect that Adani Power Mundra Limited would not be entitled to any benefit of Change in Law beyond 70% of the installed capacity i.e. 1386 MW – Findings cannot be said to not be based on the material on record, or based on extraneous considerations.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UTTAR HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LTD. AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. ADANI POWER (MUNDRA) LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai…

Section 125 of the Electricity Act, 2003 – Appellate Tribunal for Electricity – As a judicial tribunal, dealing with contracts and bargains, which are entered into by parties with equal bargaining power, APTEL is not expected to casually render findings of coercion, or fraud, without proper pleadings or proof, or without probing into evidence. The findings of coercion are therefore, set aside.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. RENEW WIND ENERGY (RAJKOT) PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay…

Long-term Power Purchase Agreements (“PPAs” for short) with Adani Power Maharashtra Limited HELD The CERC as well as the learned APTEL, on the interpretation of Articles 8.3.5 and 8.8.3 of the PPA, have concurrently found that the procurer had delayed the payment by not making the payment within the due date and, as such, GMR was entitled to late payment surcharge – Supreme court find no reason to interfere with the said concurrent findings of fact – Appeal dismissed.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED — Appellant Vs. ADANI POWER MAHARASHTRA LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Vikram…

Electricity Act 2003 – Section 126 – Kerala Electricity Supply Code, 2014 – Regulation 153(15) – Consumers in excess of the connected load/contracted load would amount to unauthorised use of electricity under explanation (b) to Section 126(6) of the Act 2003 – Regulation 153(15) of the Code 2014 is declared to be invalid being inconsistent with the provision of Section 126 of the Act 2003.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. THOMAS JOSEPH ALIAS THOMAS M. J. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dinesh Maheshwari…

Electricity Act, 2003 – Sections 61, 62 and 63 – Determination of tariff – – The Electricity Act 2003 seeks to distance the State Governments from the determination and regulation of tariff, placing such power completely within the ambit of the Appropriate Commissions

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH THE TATA POWER COMPANY LIMITED TRANSMISSION — Appellant Vs. MAHARASHTRA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud,…

Contract Act, 1872 – Sections 2 and 10 – Contract concluded – If the proposals containing the essential terms have been accepted, and the acceptance is communicated and, if the other conditions in Section 2 of the Indian Contract Act are complied with, viz., that is there is consideration and the contract is enforceable in law, within the meaning of Section 10 of the Act, it would lead to the creation of a concluded contract.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED — Appellant Vs. JSW ENERGY LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS JINDAL THERMAL POWER COMPANY LIMITED AND JINDAL TRACTABEL POWER COMPANY…

HELD there were several Inverters having numbers which were common/duplicate and interchangeably used in the same or other blocks. It was alleged that for about 186 Invertors serial numbers were commonly, duplicably and interchangeably used. Some of the inverter numbers were not legible. Therefore, it was alleged that there was lack of due diligence by the authorised personnel of the CEIG. Appeal dismissed

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M.P. POWER MANAGEMENT COMPANY LIMITED, JABALPUR — Appellant Vs. M/S. SKY POWER SOUTHEAST SOLAR INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before :…

HELD It is not disputed that enhanced power tariff became effective from 1st January, 1992 and the Government of Kerala came with the GO dated 6th February, 1992 to provide exemption from enhanced power tariff to new industrial units starting commercial production between 1st January, 1992 and 31st December, 1996 for a period of 5 years from the date the unit started commercial production. . Appeal allowed

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. RUBFILA INTERNATIONAL LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and C.T.…

You missed