Supreme Court of India Judgements

46660 Judgements hosted as on 19/11/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Electricity Act

Electricity Act

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

Nov 16, 2022 sclaw

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.…

Electricity Act

Electricity Act, 2003 – Section 14 – Grant of licence – requirements relating to the capital adequacy, creditworthiness, or code of conduct as may be prescribed by the Central Government, and no such applicant, who complies with all the requirements for grant of licence, shall be refused grant of licence on the ground that there already exists a licensee in the same area for the same purpose.

Oct 8, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH M/S. JINDAL STEEL AND POWER LIMITED — Appellant Vs. THE CHHATTISGARH STATE ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi…

Electricity Act

Power Purchase Agreement – Compounded interest – Change in Law – Adani Power is justified in stating that if the banks have charged it interest on monthly rest basis for giving loans to purchase the FGD, any restitution will be incomplete, if it is not fully compensated for the interest paid by it to the banks on compounding basis

Aug 29, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH UTTAR HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LTD. AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. ADANI POWER (MUNDRA) LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana,…

Electricity Act

Electricity Act, 2003 – Sections 2, 2(8), 9 and 24(2) – A combined reading of Section 9 and Clause (8) of Section 2 of the said Act would reveal that a person is entitled to construct, maintain or operate a captive generating plant – Such a plant should be primarily for his own use

May 16, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH CHHATTISGARH STATE POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED — Appellant Vs. CHHATTISGARH STATE ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao…

Electricity Act

Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 12 – Electricity Act, 2003 – Sections 61, 62, 84 and 86(1)(b) – Andhra Pradesh Electricity Reform Act, 1998 – Section 21 – Withdrawal of petition for grant of approval of Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) – – Appellants (DISCOMS) could not be permitted to change the decision at their whims and fancies and, particularly, when it is adversarial to the public interest and public good – APTEL has rightly held that the appellants-(DISCOMS) could not have been permitted to withdraw petition.

Feb 6, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION POWER COMPANY LIMITED OF ANDHRA PRADESH (APSPDCL) AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. M/S HINDUJA NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANOTHER —…

Electricity Act

Maharashtra Electricity Duty Act, 2016 – Section 3(2) – Levy of electricity duty on educational charitable institutions- Other than the State Government, Central Government and the local bodies and the Government hostels, no exemption from payment of electricity duty has been provided – Charitable education institutions registered under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act and/or under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, are not entitled to any exemption

Jan 15, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA — Appellant Vs. SHRI VILE PARLE KELVANI MANDAL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Sanjiv Khanna,…

Electricity Act

Electricity Act, 2003 – Sections 9 and 42(4) – Captive consumers/captive users – Liability to pay additional surcharge – HELD – In the case of the captive consumers/captive users, they have also to incur the expenditure and/or invest the money for constructing, maintaining or operating a captive generating plant and dedicated transmission lines – Therefore, as such the Appellate Tribunal has rightly held that so far as the captive consumers/captive users are concerned, the additional surcharge under sub-section (4) of Section 42 of the Act, 2003 shall not be leviable.

Dec 12, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LIMITED — Appellant Vs. M/S. JSW STEEL LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Sanjiv…

Electricity Act

Appellate Tribunal reversed the findings recorded by the Commission regarding commissioning of plant by relying upon certificate issued by the KPTCL that the Solar Plants were commissioned on 16.10.2017 – No dispute about power injected – Judgment of Appellate Tribunal upheld – Appeals dismissed.

May 9, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED (BESCOM) — Appellant Vs. E.S. SOLAR POWER PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao…

Electricity Act

Unjust enrichment of a person occurs when he has and retains money or benefits which in justice and equity belong to another – Doctrine of unjust enrichment could have been attracted if the respondent had passed on the electricity duty to its customers and then retained the refund occasioned by the 50 per cent rebate in its own pocket – This is not demonstrated to be the factual position and hence, the respondent cannot be denied relief on the application of the doctrine.

Dec 4, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. BRAHMPUTRA METALLICS LTD., RANCHI AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud…

You missed

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376 and 313 — Rape — False promise of marriage — Physical relationship with the complainant under the false promise of marriage, leading to her pregnancy and subsequent abortions — Whether the FIR should be quashed based on the allegations and the delay in filing the complaint — The petitioner argued that the relationship was consensual and the delay in filing the FIR undermines the credibility of the allegations — The respondent claimed that the petitioner deceived her with a false promise of marriage, leading to non-consensual physical relations — The Supreme Court quashed the FIR, noting the long-term consensual relationship and the lack of prima facie evidence for rape under Section 376 IPC —The Court emphasized the delay in filing the FIR and the nature of the relationship, which appeared consensual —The Court referred to previous judgments, highlighting the importance of prima facie evidence and the misuse of legal provisions —The FIR and all proceedings based on it were quashed, preventing abuse of the legal process.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120-B —Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d) — Financial misconduct and conspiracy — Whether the High Court was correct in discharging the respondent from the charges of conspiracy and financial misconduct — The CBI argued that the High Court conducted a mini-trial at the charge-framing stage and that there was sufficient suspicion to frame charges against the respondent — The respondent’s counsel argued that the material in the charge sheet did not make out a case against the respondent and that the High Court rightly discharged him —The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision to discharge the respondent, stating that mere suspicion was not enough to frame charges – The Court found that the respondent’s role was limited to signing the memorandum prepared by senior officers and participating in the Management Committee meeting, which approved the proposal — The Court emphasized that the proposal had passed through various committees and that the respondent’s actions did not amount to criminal misconduct — The appeal was dismissed, and the respondent was discharged from the charges — The trial against other accused persons will continue.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Municipal Laws

Patna Municipal Corporation Act, 1951 — Sections 146, 423 and 488(1) — The Patna Municipal Corporation imposed a royalty on advertisements, which was later increased — The respondents challenged this imposition, arguing it was a tax without legislative backing — Whether the royalty imposed by the Corporation was a tax and if it was legally enforceable without legislative sanction — The Corporation argued that the royalty was agreed upon by the parties and was not a tax — They contended that the enhancement of the rate was within their rights — The respondents argued that the imposition was a tax, which required legislative sanction, and the Corporation had no authority to levy it — The Division Bench quashed the enhancement, ruling that the Corporation had no power to impose the tax without legislative backing — The Court found that the royalty was not a tax but a fee agreed upon by the parties — It held that the Corporation’s actions were within the scope of the agreement — The Court distinguished between royalty and tax, emphasizing that royalty is based on an agreement, not statutory provision — The Court upheld the imposition of royalty as per the agreement but noted that the enhancement in rates was not challenged effectively — The judgment of the Division Bench was set aside.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Constitution

Citizenship Act, 1955 — Section 6A — Special provisions as to citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord — The case involves the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955, which grants citizenship to certain migrants from Bangladesh to Assam —The main issues include whether Parliament had the legislative competence to enact Section 6A, and if Section 6A violates Articles 6, 7, 14, 29, and 355 of the Constitution — Petitioners argue that Section 6A is unconstitutional as it conflicts with Articles 6 and 7, adopts unreasonable cut-off dates, and violates Articles 14, 29, and 355 — Respondents contend that Section 6A is within Parliament’s legislative competence under Article 11 and does not violate the Constitution — The judgment addresses the legislative competence of Parliament, the reasonableness of cut-off dates, and the impact on Assamese cultural identity — The court examines the historical context of citizenship provisions, the legislative intent behind Section 6A, and the scope of judicial review under Article 14 — The court analyzes the constitutional provisions on citizenship, the legislative objective of Section 6A, and the balance between legislative intent and constitutional mandates —The court concludes that Section 6A of the Citizenship Act is constitutional and does not violate the cited Articles of the Constitution.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw