Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Act1: electricity act 2003 section 81 · Page 1 of about 1,212 results (0.062 seconds)

Pulse this search Log in to save a LexPulse alert for this search

AI Studio

AI Brief on every result

Start a 7-day free trial - 18-section briefs and case chat on any judgment in these results, plus Semantic Search on your next query.

May 06 2009

Tata Power Company Ltd. Vs. Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commiss ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-06-2009

Subject : Electricity

Acts : Indian Electricity Act, 1910 - Sections 3, 5, 12, 22(1), 22B and 22B(1); Electricity Act, 2003 - Sections 2, 2(15), 2(17), 2(4), 2(70), 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10(1), 10(2), 10(3), 11, 11(1), 11(2), 12, 12(2), 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 33, 55(2), 55(3), 42, 42(2), 60, 62(1), 62(2), 62(95), 73, 76(1), 81(1), 81(2), 82, 83, 86, 86(1), 125, 128(1), 128(6), 128(7), 128(8), 129 and 181; Indian Electricity (Amendment) Act, 1959; Electricity Regulatory Commissions Act, 1998 - Sections 22(1) and 22; Electricity Supply Act, 1948 - Sections 43, 43A, 44, 46 and 49; Reforms Act; Essential Commodities Act, 1955; Income and Corporation Taxes Act, 1970 - Sections 488; Companies Act - Sections 255 and 256; Constitution of India - Article 19(1); MERC (Terms and Conditions of Tariff) Regulati

Reported in : 2009(111)BomLR2966; 2009LC(SC)246; 2009(5)LC2440(SC)

view of the prevailing supply shortage situation, the Commission has invoked its powers under Section 23 of the Electricity Act 2003, and has directed the distribution licensees to share the available generation capacity in a particular ratio, based on … whereupon a warning was administered.40. Submissions of BEST before the Commission were:(i) Ambit of approval process under Section 81(1)(b) of 2003 Act was required to be restricted to the price and the Commission had no power to

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 14 2014

Vijay Nath Mishra @ Vijendra Nath Mishra Vs. the State of Bihar and Ot ...

Court : Patna

Decided on : May-14-2014

Subject : Land Acquisition

For quashing of the F.I.R., bearing Alamganj P.S. Case No. 315 of 2012, registered under Section-135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on the ground of being not maintainable as the same has been … any law including the Act with reference to the provisions contained in Sections 41 to 60, 70 to 81, 93 to 105 and 165 Cr.P.C. The Division Bench in the case of Ram Chandra Pansari also did

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Feb 23 2007

A.V. Amarnathan S/O Late T.K. Karunakaran Vs. Sri. H.D. Kumaraswamy, C ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Feb-23-2007

Subject : Contempt of Court

Acts : Karnataka Electricity Reforms Act, 1999 - Sections 2C, 14, 15 and 95; Electricity Act, 2003; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) ; Contempt of Courts Act - Sections 2 and 15; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 78(2) and 81; Contempt of Court Rules - Rule 5

Reported in : 2007CriLJ2313

the Statutory provision. Commission has the necessary power, so vested in the Civil Court in terms of CPC. Electricity Act 2003 came into force with effect from 10.6.2003 under the Central Act. The State Electricity Regulatory Commission is constituted … Evidence Act, 1872 by which an allegation of fact can be proved. The presumption of genuineness attached Under Section 81 of the Evidence Act to a newspaper report cannot be treated as proved of the facts reported therein.It

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Jul 08 2010

Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Ltd. and anr. Vs. Sai Renew ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-08-2010

Subject : Electricity

Acts : Electricity Act, 2003 - Sections 61,82(1),86 (1)(a)(b),111(1),125,185,39,172(b),185(3); DevelopersElectricity Reform Act, 1998 - of Section 21 (4)(B); Electricity Regulatory Commissions Act, 1998 - Section 3,15,17,22; Reform Act, 1998 - Section 11,15(5),21,21(4),11(1)(c)&(e)

th July, 2004. Aggrieved from both these orders the Developers filed independent appeals under Section 111(1) of the Electricity Act, 2003 collectively against the order dated 20th March, 2004 as modified by order dated 7th July, 2004. These appeals

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 25 2013

V.Srinivasan Vs. Secretary to Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution C ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-25-2013

Subject : Land Acquisition

of Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code. But the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, was repealed by the Electricity Act, 2003. Section 185 of the Electricity Act, 2003 specifically repealed the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 as well as the provisions … come up with the above writ petition.4. Mr.Abudu Kumar Rajaratnam, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that under Section 81 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, all the Members, Officers and other employees of the Electricity Board were

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 24 2013

Beta Wind Farm (P) Limited Chennai and Others Vs. Tamil Nadu Electrici ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction

Decided on : May-24-2013

Subject : Land Acquisition

of Wind Energy has been given in the Regulations 2008 as well as in Section 64 of the Electricity Act, 2003. 33. Let us now refer to those Regulations and provisions of the Act,2003. 34. The relevant Regulation is … the basis of the date of signing the wheeling agreement. Therefore, the argument of the Appellant deserves rejection. 81. The State Commission through the impugned order, has determined the tariff for procurement of power by distribution licensee

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 23 2014

G.M.R. Energy Limited and Others Vs. Karnataka Electricity Regulatory ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction

Decided on : May-23-2014

Subject : Land Acquisition

adverse financial impact suffered by it as a result of State Governments order under Section 11(1) of the Electricity Act, 2003 for supply of power to the distribution companies. 2. While Appeal no. 37 of 2013 has been filed

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Nov 10 2009

Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Ltd. Vs. M/S Enercon Wind Farms ( ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Decided on : Nov-10-2009

Subject : Land Acquisition

PPA is a regulated contract which has been approved by the Regulatory Commission through a regulatory process under Section 81 (i)(d) of the Electricity Act 2003. Hence, this can not be changed by a third party on the … to the Appellant only on 10.6.05 as KPTCL was prohibited from trading electricity under the provisions of the Electricity Act 2003. Even thereafter, the bills were paid regularly by the Appellant accepting that 14.5.2003 was the date of commercial

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 30 2011

In the Matter Of: M/S. Enercon (India) Limited, Jaipur and Another Vs. ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Decided on : May-30-2011

Subject : Land Acquisition

The issue needs to be appropriately addressed for ensuring harmony between Regulation 21 and Regulation 85. 27. The electricity Act, 2003 casts a clear responsibility on the State Regulatory Commissions to promote growth of renewable energy and the State … applicable for procurement of power by distribution licensees towards fulfilment of their Renewable Purchase Obligation (RPO) as per section 86 (1) (e) of the Electricity Act, 2003. The Commission was of the view that it was fully … Provided that the reasons for such deviation(s) shall be recorded in writing. 81. Petition for Tariff determination for Renewable Energy Generating Station(s) The provisions of

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jul 21 2006

Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. Vs. Delhi Electricity Regulatory

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Decided on : Jul-21-2006

Subject : Land Acquisition

Court passed the following Order: 1. When the petition was filed Appellate Tribunal under Section 110 of the Electricity Act 2003 was not constituted. A tribunal has since been constituted under Section 110 of the Act. A notification has … Commission during the Financial Year 2003 did not increase the tariff which resulted in revenue shortfall of Rs. 81 crores, however during the Financial Year 2004 a tariff increase was allowed only by 5.1% and this led

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free

  • ‹ Prev
  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial