Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited Vs. Shamanur Sugars Limited and Others

Decided On : May-01-2014

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction

LAW: Article 5 of the PPA, a Supplemental Agreement, this Supplemental Agreement, the Original Agreement, the Supplemental Agreement, the Supplemental Agreement, the Supplemental Agreement, the Supplemental Agreement, the Evidence Act, Supplemental PPA, the Termination Notice, Section 58, the Evidence Act, Section 17, the Indian Evidence Act, the Electricity Act, the Evidence Act

PERSON: M. Karpaga Vinayagam, OP No.10, Order, OP No.14, Order, Order, Order, OP No.14, Petitioner, K Subramani, Nagindas Ramdas V Dalaptram Ichharam, ¦, ¦, Udham Singh V Ram Singh, Ramchandra Nago Patil, Udham Singh V Ram Singh, ¦, ¦, Survey Nos, Petitioner, Government Order, Impugned Order, Order

CARDINAL: 1., 2., 3, 4., 5, 6., 7.1.2014, 21.9.1999, 1.4.2005 to 31.12.2005, 8.7.2008, 30.11.2008, 8.7.2008, 5.6.2008, 26, 3.5.2009, 26, 24.1.2013, 8., two, 20.9.2009, 9, two, 10, two, 11, 12, 20.9.2009, 31.3.2005, arrear, 5.6.2008, 13, 14, 20.9.2009, 15, two, 90, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 90, 22, 23, 1.4.2003, 24, 25, 26, 7.1.2004, 27, 72, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33., 17, 491, 13, 3, 491, 182, 39, 40, 41, 1, 242, 5.6.2008, 43, 2, 600, 35, one, two, 15, 2, 15, One, 2, 200/29, 201/2, 194/13, 48, 24.1.2013, one, 50, 52., 56, One, 57, 5.6.2008, 31.12.2009, 59, 60, 61, 64

ORG: Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited, BESCOM, the Distribution Company, the State Commission, M/s. Shamanur Sugars Limited, the Generating Company, the Power Purchase Agreement, Shamanur Sugars Limited, the State Commission, the Generating Company, the Petitioner Company, the Shamanur Sugars Limited, Appeal, Tribunal, Appeal, M/s. Shamanur Sugars Limited, BESCOM, Tribunal, BESCOM, Sugar Factory, Erstwhile Karnataka Electricity Board, the Electricity Board, Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited, BESCOM, BESCOM, kWhr, kWhr, the Review Petitioner, BESCOM, BESCOM, The Generating Company, BESCOM, the Review Petitioner, The Generating Company, BESCOM, the Generating Company, the State Commission, the Generating Company, BESCOM, BESCOM, the Generating Company, SLDC for Open Access, SLDC, the Open Access, the Generating Company, Open Access, the 3rd party, the Generating Company, BESCOM, the State Commission, BESCOM, the State Commission, SLDC, the Generating Company, BESCOM, the Generating Company, BESCOM, Generating Company, the Generating Company, BESCOM, BESCOM, Application, the Generating Company, BESCOM, The State Commission, the Generating Company, the Generating Company, the Generating Company, Appeal, the Generating Company, BESCOM, the State Commission, Open Access, the Generating Company, kWhr, BESCOM, Tribunal, Tribunal, the Generating Company, BESCOM, BESCOM, the Generating Company, The Generating Company, the Central Commission, Tribunal, the Generating Company, Counsel for the Review Petitioner, the Generating Company, the Generating Company, BESCOM, the Generating Company, the Generating Company, Generating Company, the Generating Company, Original, Rs.1,89,01,695/-, 89,01, 695/-, the Generating Company, the Generating Company, the Central Commission, Counsel for the Review Petitioner:, The Generating Company, the Central Commission, Central Commissions, the Generating Company, the Generating Company, the Generating Company, the Generating Company, the Generating Company, Counsel for the Review Petitioner, the Respondent Generating Company, the Generating Company, Tribunal, Tribunal, Tribunal, the Respondent Generating Company, the State Commission, the State Commission, the Central Commission, this Petition for Review, the Generating Company, the Generating Company, Tribunal, BESCOM, the Review Petition, Appellate Forum, this Review Petition, Tariff, kWhr, the Generating Company, the Generating Company, the Generating Company, the Generating Company, the Generating Company, Generating Company, the Generating Company, the Generating Company, BESCOM, Tribunal, the Review Petitioner, the Generating Company, BESCOM, the Review Petitioner, the State Commission, the State Commission, the State Commission, the State Commission, Tribunal, the Review Petitioner, the Review Petition, Nahar V Nilima Mandal œ12, Court, Court, Ors œAs, Plaintiff, Counsel for the Petitioner that M/s. Shamanur Sugars Limited, the Generating Company, the Central Commission, the Generating Company, the Central Commission, the Generating Company, the Generating Company, the State Commission, Tribunal, Tribunal, Counsel for the Appellant, Honble Supreme Court, the Generating Company, the Central Commission, the Generating Company, the State Commission, Counsel for the Review Petitioner, the State Commission, Appellate, the State Commission, Sundaram Industries Limited V Employees Union, Court, Tribunal, Appeal, the Review Petitioner, the Respondent Generating Company, the State Commission, the State Commission, the Original Petition, the State Commission, the Generating Company, the Central Commission in Petition No.124 of, State Commission, the Generating Company, the Central Commission, the State Commission, the State Commission, the State Commission, the Generating Company, the State Commission, the State Commission, the State Commission, the Generating Company, BESCOM, the Review Petitioner, Open Access, SLDC, the State Commission, the State Commission, the State Commission, Review, this Review Petition, the Generating Company, Petition in Petition No.124 of, the Central Commission, the Generating Company, the Central Commission, the Generating Company, the Standing Clearance/NOC, BESCOM, the State Commission, the Generating Company, the State Commission, the State Commission, the Generating Company, Tribunal, the Generating Company, the Generating Company, State, the Order of the Government of Karnataka under Section 11, the Review Petitioner, the Honble Supreme Court, the State Commission, the State Commission, Tribunal, the Appellate Forum, the State Commission, Tribunal, the Review Petition

DATE: 2008, 2013, the 1st Respondent, the year 1997-98, every year, 2004-05, 2005-06, 10 years, 5 years, the 1st, the year 2004-05, the 1st, 2006, 2006, 5.6.2008, 1.7.2008, 8.7.2008, 2008, 2008, 2009, 2009, 2006, 2013, 2008, July, August, September, November, 2008, 2013, 2013, 2006, 7.3.1998, 5.5.2006, 7.3.1998, 2006, 2006, 3 months, this 2nd, 20.9.2009, 5.5.2006, 20.9.2009, 20.9.2009, 5.6.2008, 46, 83, 84, 85, 86, 41 to 46, 83, 84, 85, 86, the year 1997-98, every year, 2004-05, the year 2002-03, the subsequent years, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006, 1.4.2003 to 31.3.2004, 5.5.2006, 2013, 2009, 2013, earlier., 2013, 2.11.2012, 2013, 5.6.2008, 32, 2008, 34, the 1st, 2008, 35, 7.3.1998, 37, 2008, 38, 20.9.2009, 5.5.2006, 2011, 1974, 42, 2014, 44, 2007, 1977, 45, 2007, 1977, 194/15, 46, 47, 2008, 2011, 9.10.2012., the 1st Respondent, 5.6.2008, 51, 2011, 54, 2011, March, 2010, 55, the 1st Respondent, the 1st Respondent, the 1st, 58, 62, the 1st Respondent

ORDINAL: 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, first, Second, first, 2nd, first, first, first, first, first, 2nd

PERCENT: 5%, 5%, 5%

FAC: the Review Petitioner, BESCOM, Notice, BESCOM, BESCOM, BESCOM, the Impugned Order, Notice, the Review Petitioner, the Review Petitioner

WORK_OF_ART: OP No.10 of 2006, The Open Access, this Amendment Petition, 20.9.2009, the Amendment Petition, the Amendment Petition, the Amendment Petition, PPA Agreement, 20.9.2009, Surveys Nos, Supplemental Agreement

PRODUCT: Appellant, Appellant, Review

TIME: 1.4.2003 to

LOC: Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, BESCOM

GPE: para-34,41, Appeal, Para No.34, OP, L.Rs, OP