Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: competition amendment act 2007 section 24 amendment of section 31 Sorted by: old Court: appellate tribunal for electricity aptel Year: 2008 Page 1 of about 20 results (0.295 seconds)

Jindal Steel and Power Ltd. Vs. the Chhattisgarh State

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... notify within three months, the requirements for compliance by applicant for second and subsequent distribution licence as envisaged in section 14 of the act. with a view to provide benefits of competition to all sections of consumers, the second and subsequent licensee for distribution in the same area shall have obligation to supply to all ..... of a second license on the distribution area of one preexisting license which is as under: 5.4.7. one of the key provisions of the act on competition in distribution is the concept of multiple licenses in the same area of supply through their independent distribution systems. state governments have full flexibility in carving ..... maharashtra state electricity board case (supra). it is also our duty to point out that section 9 has since undergone a change in 2007. with amendment coming into force, no license is required under the act for supply of electricity generated from a captive generating plant to any licensee in accordance of provisions of this .....

Uttar Pradesh Power Corporaton Vs. Noida Power Company Ltd. and Uttar

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... the npcl is bound to pay the amount for which uppcl raised the bill. the impugned order to this extent has to be upheld. the part of the order which amends the bulk supply tariff for 45 mw cannot be sustained and has to be set aside. 8. one of us (technical member), on the other hand, in a ..... violative of the clause 5.3.3. of the national electricity policy and clearly attracts the provisions of section 60 of the act providing suo motto power to the commission to issue directions to prevent adverse effect on competition, even if the agreement is valid. 9. the judgment of the technical member sets-aside the impugned order and remands the ..... show that they had any alternative source of power purchase during the period of the contract with uppcl for additional 10 mw i.e. between may, 2006 to february, 2007.8. learned counsel mr. sitesh mukherjee for uppcl further contended that npcl had entered into an agreement after taking into account, the commercial risk involved in the transaction and .....

Small Hydro Power Developers' Vs. Transmission Corporation Of A.P.

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... constitution and treaties, conventions and protocols on the issues relating to environment.69. in order to support conservation of environment, constitution was amended by 42nd amendment act, 1976. by virtue of the amendment, articles 48a and article 51a(g) were inserted in the constitution.article 48a, interalia, provides that the state shall endeavour to ..... cost of projects based on nonconventional and renewable sources of energy. it also points out that the cost of energy can be reduced by promoting competition within such projects. at the same time, it emphasises that adequate promotional measures would also have to be taken for development of technologies and ..... reach the policy directions issued by the state.in chhattisgarh biomass energy developers association and ors. v.chhattisgarh s.e.r.c. and ors. 2007 aptel 711, it was observed that where power purchase agreements between distribution licensees and the generating companies utilizing renewable sources of energy are in conformity .....

Uttar Pradesh Power Corpn. Limited and Another Vs. Noida Power Corpn. ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... there is no rationale in saying that because the uppcl is not adhering to the statutory requirements and has not submitted to tariff filing the commission can amend the bulk supply tariff of npcl. the commission has to use appropriate measures to compel the uppcl to adhere to statutory requirements or to force filing ..... the different co-ordinates of powers and responsibility perform their duties and obligations cast upon them in the act, in letter and spirit, the objects of enacting the act, which includes development of electricity industry and promoting competition therein, would always remain a distant dream. 37. i find that the performance of uppcl in extending ..... . considering the convergence of the outcomes of the consideration of perspectives at [aa] and [bb] above, the impugned order of the commission dated 08 feb. 2007 is set aside, and the case is remanded back to the commission for denovo consideration with directions to resolve the dispute between the parties under section 86(1 .....

Powergrid Corporation of India Vs. Central Electricity Regulatory

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Reported in : (2008)LCAPTEL89

..... when read along with petition no.40/2000 leads to the conclusion that instead of granting the tariff of 90 paise per unit as per the notification dated 16.12.2007, the appellant was being granted only 35 paise per unit. will it be proper to say that the appellant never wanted any raise in its share in the ..... taken up is whether the commission was right in exercising the power of review. the power of review is provided for in section 94(1)(f) of the electricity act 2003. the power of the commission to review its own orders is similar to the power of a civil court to review its orders viz. as is available under ..... the tariff for the appellant after the enactment of the electricity act 2003, hereinafter referred to as the act, being the central commission under the act. the tariff fixation is guided by section 61 & 62 of the act. the erc act guided tariff determination by the provisions of section 28. both the acts recognize grant of subsidy as independent of tariff determination. the cerc .....

Jalan Concast Ltd., Unit 2, Vs. U.P. Electricity Regulatory

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Reported in : (2008)LCAPTEL192

..... in its appeal no. fa 96 and others of 2002. the appellants filed petition no. 458 of 2007 before the commission challenging the bill as being barred by section 56(2) of the electricity act 2003. section 56(2) of the electricity act 2003 bars recovery of dues which are not being shown on the bills for two years.the appellant contended ..... was struck down by the high court in lml ltd v. state of uttar pradesh and ors. 2001(2) awc 1472 on the ground that the circular amounted to amendment of tariff order passed by the commission and the uppcl being the licensee had no such power. the uppcl accordingly on 31.08.01 withdrew its circulars dated 08. ..... the respondent submits that the appellant should have approached the forum for redressal of grievances of the consumers established under sub-section 5 of section 42 of the electricity act 2003. the learned counsel for the appellant on the other hand submits that the issue involved in this appeal is not one which falls within the jurisdiction of such .....

Mula Pravara Electric Vs. Maharashtra Electricity

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Reported in : (2008)LCAPTEL135

..... applicable to 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 of ..... retail sale to the consumers in the area of such persons would be as determined for the licensee by the appropriate commission. 9.15. if not determined competitively, the bpp should be set on a normative basis based on representative consumer mix and should not vary on a case-to- case basis. the bpp ..... 's application for tariff and that the functions of commission are distinct under the act and in the circumstances, commission had to revise the tariff of the appellant in order to bridge the revenue gap in order dated february 23, 2007 in case no. 51 of 2005.37. responding to the allegation that the .....

M.P. Electricity Regulatory Vs. Universal Cables Ltd., Satna

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... of law. before the two appeals could be disposed of by this tribunal, section 9 of the electricity act 2003 was amended and the following proviso was inserted therein: provided further that no licence shall be required under this act for supply of electricity generated from a captive generating plant to any licensee in accordance with the provisions ..... learned sr. advocate appearing for the review petitioner vehemently submitted that the feeder line between the two respondents (appellants in the appeal nos. 20 and 77 of 2007) cannot be part of either the grid or the distribution system and therefore flow of energy from the captive power plant to its neighbour cannot amount to taking ..... also filed review petition no. 32/07 on the same terms.the two review petitions are opposed by the respondents (appellant in appeals no. 20 & 77 of 2007). we have heard all the parties to these two review petitions.7. the review petitioners' must show some error apparent on the face of the judgment in order .....

Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Vs. Ppn Power Generating Co. Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... of electricity applicable for all categories of consumers. the board has submitted the 'terms and conditions of supply of electricity' issued on 24 dec. 88 (as amended up to 31 jan.01), which is the applicable policy in the instant case for the relevant period and has since been in public domain. the respondent no ..... distribution of electricity in the state has preferred this appeal against the impugned order of tamil nadu electricity regulatory commission (for brevity the 'commission') passed on 02 apr. 2007.respondent no. 1, the ppn power generation company (for short the 'company) is a private company which has established a generation capacity of 330.5 mw situated ..... and condition of supply of electricity, is liable to pay the applicable registration charges, development charges, and other charges? (d) what are the effects of limitation act on the claims of the parties? 4.5 energy prior to completion. upon the company's request, tneb shall provide, at the sole cost and expense of the .....

Runwal Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Maharashtra Elecy. Regulatory

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... supply, distribution, consumption or use of power for securing equitable distribution of electricity and promoting competition. we, however, in our judgment held that while load management charge can be imposed under section 23 of the electricity act 2003, it did not form part of the tariff for generation, transmission and distribution and ..... ltd. and m/s. vasudev c. wadhwa constructions) and rel, the distribution licensee, is of the view that with the subsequent judgment dated december 19, 2007 issued in case of arr determination of maharashtra state electricity distribution company limited, the applicability of tariff category lt-9 for multiplexes and shopping malls getting supply of ..... of more than 20 kw and had been classified under lt-ii (non-domestic) and ht-ii (industrial) category.vide impugned order dated 18.05.2007, the commission created a new category of lt-ix for multiplexes and shopping malls having sanctioned load of more than 20 kw including single ownership establishments. .....