Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: electricity amendment act 2007 section 8 amendment of section 43 Court: appellate tribunal for electricity aptel Page 3 of about 292 results (0.080 seconds)

Transmission Corporation of A.P. Vs. Andhra Pradesh State Electricity

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Reported in : (2006)LCAPTEL682

..... that it is in conformity with sections 86(1)(e) and 61(h) of electricity act, 2003.29. therefore, the ppa executed between the nce developers and aptransco/discoms could be re-opened for incorporating amendments approved by the commission, provided the commission is convinced that the amendments would help sustain the operational stability of such projects and are in conformity with section 86 ..... 86(1)(e) to issue appropriate directions with a view to promote generation of electricity from renewable sources of energy. this call for reopening of the power purchase and wheeling agreements by the commission for suitable amendments in keeping with the provisions of section 86(1)(e) of electricity act, 2003." thus, if approached by the signatories of the ppa the commission could, if .....

Bses Yamuna Power Ltd. Vs. the Delhi Electricity Regulatory

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Reported in : (2006)LCAPTEL1319

..... of 6.69% derived from the principles and the rates specified by the ministry of power's notification dated 31.01.1992 as amended on 29.03.1994, issued under the 6th schedule to the electricity supply act, 1948 ('ministry of power notification'), which reasons justify the departure to supplant the said rate by a new rate of 3.75%.12 ..... by the impugned order to deviate from the principles and rates notified by the ministry of power on 31.01.92 and as amended on 29.03.94 ,issued in terms of vi schedule to the electricity (supply) act, 1948. the question whether derc could deviate and whether it had indicated reasons for such deviation from schedule vi is the ..... depreciation at 3.75% fixed by the commission, at the risk of repetition, we point out is a misdirection and misreading of the notification issued under schedule vi of the electricity act, 1948.the contention advanced by the discom with respect to claim of 6.69% of depreciation also will fall in line with sections 205, 209, 211, 616 (c .....

Gmr Industries Ltd. Vs. Andhra Pradesh Electricity

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Reported in : (2007)LCAPTEL101

..... also addresses the issue adequately.22. the ppa was approved by the commission under section 21(4) of andhra pradesh electricity reform act 1998. all pre-existing electricity acts including the ap electricity reform act 1998 were repealed by the electricity act, 2003. but, by the virtue of sections 185(2)(a) and 185(3) of ea-2003, the agreements ..... the aptransco, subject to the condition that any further modification of the agreement shall be done only with the prior approval of andhra pradesh electricity regulatory commission. however, the amendments to the agreement as per the respective orders of aperc from time to time shall be carried out. all the conditions mentioned in ..... consent is the standard format approved on 2nd january, 2002 and as amended from time to time. the petitioner cannot enforce any other agreement as the same would be void under section 21 (4) and (5) of a.p. electricity reform act 1998. the alleged non-communication of the commission's order dated 2nd january .....

U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. Vs. N.T.P.C. Ltd. and Central

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Reported in : (2007)LCAPTEL1296

..... apart, it is cerc which is the competent authority to approve or undertake prudent check and allow additional capitalisation after amendment of section 43-a(2) of the electricity (supply) act, 1948 by amending 14 of the act, 1998" and further states that "cea is no longer the authority to approve project for additional investments on the ..... schedules and report of auditors, 10. for sake of convenience the above grievances in respect of issues raised in appeal nos. 205 of 2005 and 9 of 2007 can be clubbed together in broader categories. we have, therefore, clubbed the issues requiring our consideration and dealt with them in the highlighted paragraphs that follow: ..... even prayed for by the respondent. ii. the grievances emanating from the impugned order dated 26.10.2006 which are the subject of appeal no. 9 of 2007 are described below: (a) amount of capitalisation not reflected in the balance sheet is not eligible for additional capitalisation for the purpose of determination of tariff. .....

Uttaranchal Jal Vidyut Nigam Ltd. Vs. Uttaranchal Electricity

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Reported in : (2008)LCAPTEL182

..... , uttaranchal and kerala.17. in view of the above, we answer the query raised by the honorable supreme court in its order dated 23.08.2007. section 43-a(2) of electricity (supply) act 1948 stood omitted for the state of uttar pradesh on 11.09.2000 and the omission of 43-a(2) continued for the new state of ..... pradesh despite coming into force of the electricity reforms act.7. the reforms act does not affect the central act in any way. section 51 of the central act authorises the central government to omit section 43-a(2) of the electricity (supply) act 1948 by a gazette notification.the provision is extracted below: 51. amendment of act 54 of 1948 : with effect from ..... government may, before the expiration of two years from that day, by order, make such adaptations and modifications of the law, whether by way of repeal or amendment, as may be necessary or expedient, and thereupon every such law shall have effect subject to the adaptations and modifications so made until altered, repealed or .....

In the Matter Of: Velagapudi Power Generation Limited Vs. Southern Pow ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... . 21. according to the appellant, the ppa dated 25.02.2002 as amended on 23.08.2002 is not void. this contention also is not correct because the ppas which received the consent of the state commission under section 21.4 of the a.p. electricity reform act, 1998 alone are valid and binding. in other words, the ppas with the ..... ppa the appellant for the reasons best known to it choose to file the present petition before the state commission alleging coercion and financial duress etc only on 22.05.2007, i.e. after more than 7 months. there was no reason as to why the allegations of coercion have not been agitated before the same forum prior to its ..... since various disputes arose between southern power distribution company of andhra pradesh (r-1) and ap. transco (r-2), the appellant filed a petition in op no. 7 of 2007 before the state commission seeking for various reliefs in respect of the grievances arising out of the disputes relating to the conduct of the licensee (r-1) and for modification .....

Pudumjee Pulp and Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. Maharashtra State Electricity

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Reported in : (2006)LCAPTEL914

..... could not have been challenged belatedly in the review petitions filed in the years 2001 and 2004.besides, the tariff formulation of 1998 was not made under the electricity act, 2003 and, therefore, the same could not be the subject matter of review petitions.42. therefore, the challenge to the bill dated 16^th june, ..... challenged, was not interfered with by the bombay high court, it attained finality as no appeal was filed before the supreme court. even the application seeking amendment of the writ petition for challenging the tariff formulation of 1998 of the mseb, providing for additional demand charges from consumers having captive power plant synchronised with ..... clear picture of the prayers made in the writ petition preferred before the bombay high court, the grounds of challenge raised therein, application of the appellant for amendment of the writ petition, outcome of that application, and the basis on which the bombay high court dismissed the writ petition in limine.24. before the .....

Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. Vs. Delhi Electricity Regulatory

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... provide for the discoms.concedingly the impugned tariff fixation is in exercise of powers vested in the terms of the provisions of the delhi electricity reforms act, 2000 as well as the electricity act, 2003. though it is claimed that the impugned order of tariff fixation is to advance the public interest, the binding policy directions which ..... from rs.2600 crore to rs.3450 crore based on assumptions about key parameters which were not provided to the commission at the time of issuance of amendment to the policy directions. subsequently, the gnctd provided the copy of financial restructuring plan prepared at the time of privatization upon a specific request from the ..... not as if the same is repayable or to be realized or salvaged or set off during the transitory period, viz., the period ending with 31st march, 2007, unless an extraordinary tariff upward revision is to be allowed. in fact no amortization schedule and other details been provided for. same challenge squarely applies even with .....

M.P. Power Trading Co. Ltd. Vs. Central Electricity Regulatory

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Reported in : (2007)LCAPTEL49

..... and supplied from the above mentioned power station of the national thermal power corporation (ntpc) at gandhar is enclosed. this notification is being issued under section 43a(2) of the electricity (supply) act, 1948. 2. the fixed charges have been determined based on the amounts capitalized in the accounts of ntpc up to 31^st march, 1996. 3. the tariff determined would ..... the financial year 1^st april, 2000 to 31^st march, 2001 based on actual expenses incurred during the same period which worked out to 2,654 lacs. ntpc, however, amended the petition no. 94 of 2002 and claimed o&m expenses on the basis of previous year's (i.e. 1999-2000) actual expense escalated by 10 per cent following ..... 2. the present appeal is directed against the order dated 27^th september, 2006, in petition no. 94 of 2002 passed by the central electricity regulatory commission, the respondent no. 1 herein, by which the respondent no. 1 has re-determined the o&m charges for the period from 1^st april, 2000 to 31^ .....

Tata Steel Ltd. and Tata Power Com. Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... 296 dated 5.2.93, after technical inspection of central electricity authority, in view of the proposal for amendment in the configuration, now the state government, after consultation with electricity board, has granted its permission under section 15a, 43 (a), (c) and 44(1) of electricity supply act, 1948 for establishment of unit of 2 x 120 mw in ..... , contends that the power generated by tpcl being supplied to tsl, a distribution licensee, will not attract any cross subsidy under section 42(2) of the electricity act 2003. the commission contends that the impugned order does not call for any interference.16. we have heard the counsel for the parties who have supplemented their ..... tata power company ltd. (tpcl for short) to challenge the order of the jharkhand state electricity regulatory commission (the commission for short) dated 02.11.07 in case no. 13 of 2007 & 2008. the prayer in petition no. 13 of 2007 was to treat the two power generating units described as units 2 & 3 at jojobera, .....