Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: competition amendment act 2007 section 24 amendment of section 31 Court: appellate tribunal for electricity aptel Page 7 of about 238 results (0.236 seconds)

Western Electricity Co. of Orissa Vs. Sarat Chandra Mohanty, General

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Reported in : (2007)LCAPTEL626

..... scheme, transferred 51 per cent of the equity shares with management control in the three discoms. the disinvestment of shares in the three discoms was through a competitive bidding. pursuant to the disinvestment, the gridco and the discoms executed separate instruments such as shareholders-agreement, bulk supply-agreement, escrow agreement, hypothecation agreement etc.it ..... to tide over the situation, the three discoms issued bonds in the year 2000 rescheduling the payment of principal to october, 2005, october, 2006 and october, 2007 with interest at 12.5 per cent p.a. payable once in every six months. gridco in its turn had assigned the bonds in favour of ntpc. ..... appointed officers from gridco/ oerc, as special officer and held, that those officers shall have the same powers as directors of the company under the companies act, 1956 may exercise. certain other directions were issued to the discoms by the regulatory commission by the impugned order.14. the three discoms rushed to this .....

Orissa Power Transmission Corporation Limited Vs. Orissa Electricity R ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction

..... generating companies and transmission licensees; (b) the generation, transmission, distribution and supply of electricity are conducted on commercial principles; (c) the factors which would encourage competition, efficiency, economical use of the resources, good performance and optimum investments; (d) safeguarding of consumers interest and at the same time, recovery of the cost ..... next year. this principle has been accepted by the honble tribunal in the judgment dated 08.10.2010 in appeal no. 55 to 57 of 2007 wherein this tribunal has categorically held that the mere fact that optcl (r-2) was unable to utilize the amount allocated towards repair and ..... under: 15. we notice that the present tariff regulations, 2004 of the state commission lays down only general principles as per section 61 of the act for determination or transmission tariff. we, therefore, direct the state commission to take immediate steps to formulate specific tariff regulations for transmission of electricity, if .....

North Eastern Electric Power Vs. Assam State Electricity Board and

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... ) and i am conversant with the facts deposed herein. 2. that i am filing the present affidavit in reply to the affidavit dated 23.7.2007 filed by the assam state electric board, respondent no. 1 herein (hereinafter called the 'aseb') whereby aseb has alleged neepco of malafide concealment of facts ..... national thermal power corporation limited, the national hydroelectric power corporation limited and the north eastern electric power corporation limited (acquisition and transfer of power transmission system) act, 1993 ("act 1993)" whereunder, mr. kapur contended, that the appellant was required to transfer the entire power transmission system to the m/s power grid corporation of ..... (hereinafter called the act 1993') for the kopli hydro electric project (hereinafter called khep) of neepco. 3. i say in the outset that the allegations made by aseb in the said affidavit dated 23.7.2007 are totally baseless, without any merit, false and misleading. all the allegations of malafide concealment of .....

In the Matter Of: North Delhi Power Ltd and Others Vs. Delhi Electrici ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... this order shall be subject to the final outcome of afr no. 372/2007 before the appellate tribunal for electricity. 48. this appeal has ..... the revised tariffs applicable from 1st january, 2008. this order may be amended reviewed or modified in accordance with the provisions of the electricity act, 2003 and the regulations made thereunder. ..... under the delhi electricity regulatory commission (terms and conditions for determination of transmission tariff) regulations, 2007 read with the provisions of electricity act, 2003 hereby pass this order signed, dated and issued on 20th day of december, 2007. the petitioner shall take immediate steps to implement the said order, so as to make .....

In the Matter Of: Purti Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Nagpur Vs. the Tata Power ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... be demanded by respondent no. 4, as the transmission charges and wheeling charges are now paid by the petitioner. however, subsequently, notes of argument dated november 21, 2007 have been filed wherein pskl has sought to press only prayer clauses (i) and (ii). 33.0 accordingly, the commission decided issues at (i) and (ii) above ..... also that mseb will not have liability to purchase the power except the power generated during the period of testing and commissioning, in this case till 31.03.2007. 11.1.4 the plant was ready for testing and commissioning and accordingly connectivity agreement was executed with respondent no. 4, maharashtra state electricity transmission company ltd ..... by the commission, provided the commission is convinced that the amendment would help to sustain the operational stability of such purchase and are in conformity with section 86(i)(e) and section 61(h) of the electricity act, 2003. 15.5 the case before us is different. here the parties have a valid epa in .....

M.P. Power Trading Company Ltd. Vs. Central Electricity Regulatory Com ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... submitted that the debt equity ratio of the generating station has been determined in accordance with second proviso to regulation 20(2) of the tariff regulations, 2004 as amended and advance against depreciation has been calculated in accordance with regulation 38(ii) (b) of the tariff regulations, 2004. cerc representative submitted that both debt equity ..... and accordingly awarded advance against depreciation as per proviso to regulation 38(ii) (b) which is not correct. hence, the aad granted for the year 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 should be recalculated by the cerc. 36. learned representative for cerc stated that the appellant has alleged that it had accepted the debt ..... the central electricity regulatory commission (terms and conditions of tariff) regulations, 2004 under the powers vested in it under section 178 read with section 61 of the act. the provisions of clause (2) of regulation 36 of tariff regulations, 2004 are extracted as under: 36(2) in case of the generating stations for .....

In the Matter Of: Western Electricity Supply Company of Orissa Ltd. (W ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... karpaga vinayagam, chairperson 1. the appellants are distribution companies. they filed applications for approval of their arr and for determination of retail supply tariff in respect of the fy 2007-08. since some of the claims have been disallowed, all these appellants have filed these three separate appeals before this tribunal, on being aggrieved over the same. since ..... revenues generated from the tariff. as a matter of fact, in the next years tariff, i.e. for fy 2008-09, the state commission has in fact acted upon the actuarial valuation and given the benefit of the same. this would apply to this period also. in regard to administrative and general expenses, two items of the ..... benefit fund not a lesser terminal benefit fund. it is noticed that as a matter of fact, the state commission in the next tariff year 2008-09, has acted upon the actuarial valuation and given the benefit of the same. in our view, this benefit would apply to the appellants in respect of this period also. 31. .....

Essar Steels Ltd. Vs. Chhattisgarh State Electricity

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... only for the supply at 11 kv and 33 kv. the tariffs of the various categories under the tariff order dated june 15, 2005 as amended by letter dated august 29, 2005 insofar as is relevant to the present case is summarized below:category demand charges energy charges rs./kva/month rs ..... from hv-5 to hv-4 with effect from june 1, 2006. while so, a proposal was mooted and accepted by the first respondent to amend the electricity supply agreement so as to provide for contract demand to be taken as 15 mva with effect from may 25, 2005, 20 mva ..... the appellant cannot proceed on the assumption that the proposal made by cseb will be accepted by the commission, that the commission is mandated under the act to determine tariff according to certain principles. he stated that if the appellant had any suggestion or objection to the categorization, he should have participated ..... the commission. accordingly, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. pronounced in the open court on the 27th day of august, 2007. .....

Reliance Energy Ltd. Vs. the Maharashtra Electricity

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... data also. she further submitted that vide letters dated february 07, 2007 and february 13, 2007, merc sought certain queries from rel which were duly replied by it vide its letters dated february 9, 2007, february 10, 2007 andfebruary 12,2007 and that this shows that rel had acted fast in giving requisite information and details to merc.8. ms anjali ..... fy 2007-08 to fy 2009-10.submission of the petition was delayed by rel ..... ) petition to merc by november 30, 2006 for the fy 2007-08 as per regulations 9 of the merc (terms and conditions) tariff appeal no. 90 of 2007 regulations notified by merc under provisions of the electricity act, 2003 (the act). merc was determining tariff for the year 2007-08 which was a part of the first myt period for .....

Central Coalfields Ltd Jharkhand Vs. Dlf Power Ltd Haryana

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... the orders of the honble supreme court as the commissions order was issued in december 2004 and amended/reviewed in february 2005 whereas the order of the honble supreme court was issued only in july 2007. the issue that was raised before and decided by the honble supreme court was that to determine the ..... an opportunity of hearing the appellant, by issuing notice to the appellant. though the proceedings before the state commission are judicial proceedings under section 95 of the electricity act (ea) and the state commission is vested with all the powers of the civil court under the cpc under section 94 of the ea, the state commission ..... commission has neither the authority, nor the jurisdiction to fix the tariff between the parties, namely the consumer the appellant and the generator, the respondent and the act provides jurisdiction to the state commission only to settle the dispute between the licensee and the generating company, and not the consumer and the generator as in this case .....