Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
MR. RAKESH NATH, TECHNICAL MEMBER, J. Appeal No. 192 of 2010 has been filed by Tamil Nadu Electricity Consumers’ Association against the order dated 31.7.2010 passed by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission determining the tariff for generation, intra-state transmission and retail supply tariff. Appeal No. 206 of 2010 has been filed by Southern India Mills Association challenging the same order. The appellants in both the appeals are the associations of electricity consumers in the state of Tamil Nadu. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (Electricity Board) and Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission (State Commission) are the first and second respondents respectively. 2. The brief facts of the case are as under: 2.1. The State Commission issued its first tariff order under Section 29 of the Electricity Regulatory Commission Act, 1998 on 15.3.2003 based on the petition filed by the Electricity Board (Respondent-1) on 25.9.2002. 2.2. The State Commission notified its Tari...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
M. KARPAGA VINAYAGAM, CHAIRPERSON M/s. Suchi Papers Mills Limited is the Appellant. M/s. Surya Processors Private Limited is the Second Respondent. 2. The Appellant took the electricity connection from the independent feeder of M/s. Samtel Colour Limited. The Appellant as well as M/s. Samtel Colour Limited are the continuous process units doing manufacturing work round the clock. 3. M/s. Surya Processors Private Limited the second Respondent applied for the independent feeder but due to non availability of corridor, the UP Power Corporation Limited, 5th Respondent proposed to connect M/s. Surya Processors Private Limited with M/s. Samtel Colour Limited’s feeder. Under clause 3.4 (d) (ii) of the supply code, the consent from the independent feeder (original consumer) is mandatory. Therefore, M/s. Surya Processors Private Limited filed a petition before the State Commission for giving a direction to the distribution licensee to release electricity connection to M/s. Surya Processo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
Appeal No.185 of 2010 THE HONOURABLE MR. RAKESH NATH, TECHNICAL MEMBER and THE HONOURABLEMR. JUSTICE P.S. DATTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER In the matter: M/s. Entertainment World Developers Pvt.Ltd, Madhya Pradesh Versus Madhya Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission, OthersCounsel for the Appellant: Mr. K.Rai, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Niraj Sharma, Mr. Vikrant Singh Bais, Advocates. Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. M.G. Ramachandran, Ms. Ranjitha Ramachandran, Ms. Surbhi Sharma, Ms. Shikha Ohri Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mr. Anand K. Ganesan Ms. Swapna Seshadri, Advocates. P.S. DATTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, J. The Madhya Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission (The Commission, for short), the respondent No. 1 herein passed an order on 3.10.2008 whereby the Commission directed that the tariff for single point supply to the appellant which is said to have taken HT connection of 4000 KVA from 33 KV supply system shall be charged as per tariff schedule HV 3.3 applicable to shopping malls wit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
Per Hon’ble Shri Rakesh Nath, Technical Member 1. The above Appeals have been filed by M/s Sarjan Realities Pvt. Ltd., Indian Wind Energy Association and M/s Enercon (India) Limited, Wind Energy Developers in the state of Maharashtra. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company (R-2) is Distribution Licensee in Maharashtra. M/s Bajaj Finserv Ltd. (R-3) is also a Wind Energy Developer. 2. The Appeals are against the order dated 9.3.2009 in case No. 8 of 2008 by Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (R-1). In the impugned order the Commission gave clarifications sought for by M/s Bajaj Finserv Limited (Respondent 3), on Commission’s order dated 20.11.2007 regarding charges for wheeling of energy from Wind Energy Projects classified as Group II Projects, through the transmission and distribution system of MSEDCL (R-2). Group II Wind Energy Projects are those projects which were commissioned after 27.12.1999 and before 1.4.2003. Appellant’s Wind Energy Proj...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, Chairperson 1. M/s. Karamchand Thaper and Bros. (C.S.) Ltd is the Appellant herein. M/S. M P Power Trading Co. Ltd is the First Respondent. Madhya Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission (State Commission) is the Second Respondent. 2. The Appellant has filed this Appeal challenging the impugned order dated 21.2.2012 passed by the State Commission as against the Appellant upholding the contention of M.P State Trading Company Ltd (R-1) that the contract between them was a concluded contract. 3. The brief facts leading to the filing of this Appeal are as follows:- (a) M/s.MP Power Trading Company Limited (R-1) invited tenders through the Expression of Interest on 16.4.2009 for the sale of power on firm basis for the period from 16.7.2009 to 30.9.2009. In response to the same, M/s. Karamchand Thaper and Brothers (C.S ) Limited , the Appellant through its letter dated 21.4.2009 made the offer for purchase of the said power. Accepting the said offer, the M P Power Tra...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction
Surendra Kumar, Judicial Member. 1. The Appeal No. 131 of 2012 has been preferred by the Appellant under Section 111 of the Electricity Act, 2003 against the Order dated 30.3.2012 passed by the Bihar Electricity Regulatory Commission (hereinafter called the State Commission) in the Tariff Petition, being Case No. TP 02 of 2011 approving the Annual Revenue Requirement (ARR) and Appeal No. 131 of 2012 Retail Supply Tariff (RST) for the Financial Year 2012-13 of Bihar State Electricity Board (hereinafter called the Electricity Board), Respondent No.2 in this Appeal, the distribution licensee in the State of Bihar. 2. Facts of the case giving rise to Appeal No. 131 of 2012. The relevant facts of the case, relating to Appeal No. 131 of 2012, are as follows: 2.1 that the Appellant is an association of industries and traders who are taking supply of electricity from the Electricity Board (Respondent No.2) under different category i.e. low-tension, high-tension, etc from the electrical system ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction
Surendra Kumar, Judicial Member. 1. This is an Appeal preferred under Section 111 of the Electricity Act, 2003 against the Order dated 18.7.2012 passed by the Bihar State Electricity Regulatory Commission (hereinafter called the State Commission) in Case No. 14 of 2011 and 15 of 2011 whereby the learned State Commission has rejected the petitions of the Appellants/Petitioners on the ground that since the petitioners namely; M/s Bharat Sugar Mills and M/s New Swadeshi Sugar Mills, even after being given opportunity several times, did not file any petition for determination of tariff specific to their generation plants and the State Commission has not determined the tariff for their plants for the period prior to 1.6.2009. 2. The Appellants-Petitioners have challenged the impugned order dated 18.7.2012 on the ground that though the State Commission upheld and reiterated the norms and benchmarks fixed by it, but failed to apply the same and made a clear departure from the said norms and b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
1. The present appeal is filed by two appellants namely Tata Steel Ltd. (TSL for short) and 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, Jamshedpur owned by appellant No. 2, TPCL as captive power plants of the appellant No. 1, TSL, exclusively for the purpose of steel works TSL. This prayer was turned down by the impugned order.2. TSL earlier known as Tata Iron & Steel Ltd. (TISCO for short) has been engaged in production of iron and steel and related activities. It was established at Jamshedpur in 1907. It set up a power plant inside its steel works with the capacity of 147.5 MW. In 1923, TISCO, now TSL, was granted sanction under Section 28(1) of the Indian Electricity Act 1910 (hereinafter referred to as A...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
Per Hon’ble Mr. Justice M. Karpaga Vinayagam, Chairperson 1. Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited is the Appellant herein. Devangere Sugar Company Limited is the first respondent. 2. A Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) was entered into between the Appellant and the Respondent. In pursuance of the same the Respondent, the generating company, was bound to sell the power generated by it to the Appellant at the agreed rates as mentioned in the PPA. Since the agreed rates were not paid in time, the Respondent sent a Default Notice to the Appellant stating that if the dues were not paid within the stipulated time, the contract will be terminated. However, the reply was sent by the Appellant to the Respondent pointing out that there had been no default. Since default had not been rectified, the Respondent sent a Notice of Termination and stopped supply to the Appellant. 3. Challenging the same, the Appellant filed a petition before the Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission (S...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
M. KARPAGA VINAYAGAM, CHAIRPERSON M/s GVK Power (Goindwal Sahib) Limited is the Appellant. The Punjab State Commission is the 1st Respondent. Punjab State Electricity Board is the 2nd Respondent. 2. Aggrieved by the impugned order dated 6.3.2009, passed by the Punjab State Commission in the petition filed by the Punjab State Electricity Board for approval of the amended and restated Power Purchase Agreement entered into between the Appellant and the Respondents for the generation and sale of electricity by the Appellant to the Respondents, the Appellant has filed this Appeal. 3. The necessary facts for the disposal of this Appeal are as follows: (i) M/s GVK Power Limited, the Appellant, is a generating company setting up a Thermal Power Project at Goindwal Sahib to supply electricity to the Electricity Board. (ii) In the year 1996, the Government of Punjab formulated an international competitive bidding process for inviting proposal and selection of competitors to establish a Coal...
Tag this Judgment!