Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: karnataka traffic control act 1960 section 7 signals Court: appellate tribunal for electricity aptel Page 1 of about 25 results (0.070 seconds)

Gajendra Haldea S/O Late Shri Rao Vs. Central Electricity Regulatory

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Reported in : (2008)LCAPTEL203

..... scope of the two provisions is different. as already pointed out, under the original section 121 the chairperson had the jurisdiction of general superintendence and control over the appropriate commissions, while present section 121 of the act confers power on the appellate tribunal to issue, from time to time, such orders, instructions or directions as it deems fit, to the regulatory commissions ..... transfer schemes for the transfer of the assets and staff into successor companies. orissa, haryana, andhra pradesh, karnataka, rajasthan and uttar pradesh have passed their reform acts and unbundled their state electricity boards into separate companies. delhi and madhya pradesh have also enacted their reforms acts which, inter alia, envisage unbundling/ corporatisation of sebs. 3. with the policy of encouraging private sector participation .....

Chhattisgarh State Power Transmission Co. Ltd. Vs. Chhattisgarh State ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... lead to cross subsidies reaching unsustainable levels (c) involvement of the government in determination of tariff. 23) the objectives of the act can similarly be identified as under: (a) in encouraging private sector participation in the electricity industry (b) tariff fixation by ..... , rajasthan and uttar pradesh have passed their reform acts and unbundled their state electricity boards into separate companies. delhi and madhya pradesh have also enacted their reforms acts which, inter alia, envisage unbundling/corporatisation of sebs. ..... acts. 2. starting with orissa, some state governments have been undertaking reforms through their own reform acts. these reforms have involved unbundling of the state electricity boards into separate generation, transmission and distribution companies through transfer schemes for the transfer of the assets and staff into successor companies. orissa, haryana, andhra pradesh, karnataka .....

Vbc Ferro Alloys Limited., Hyderabad and Others Vs. Karnataka Electric ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction

..... advanced on behalf of the respondents, though look attractive, deserve to be rejected on closer examination. it is observed from the records that when power corporation of karnataka ltd. (pckl) on behalf of the petitioner sought for approval for purchase of power at the rates obtained through the bid from the respondents, this commission considered ..... ) konaseema gas power limited are the appellants herein. 2. they have filed this appeal as against the impugned order dated 13.1.2012 passed by the karnataka state commission allowing the petition filed by bescom by directing the appellants to supply power to bescom as per the power purchase agreement dated 27.2.2009 entered ..... ppa. the same was duly communicated by the distribution licensee to the appellant. according to the appellant, the ppa has become impossible to be acted upon due to reasons beyond their control. in our view the ppa is valid till 31.12.2014. however, if according to the appellants, the ppa has become impossible to be .....

The South Indian Sugars Mills Vs. Karnataka Electricity

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Reported in : (2007)LCAPTEL126

..... assistance on softer terms to nce projects based on the policy framework of the government of india. karnataka government also set up karnataka renewable energy development ltd. (kredl).5. section 62(1) of the electricity act, 2003 (the act) empowers the kerc to determine the tariff for supply of electricity by a generating company to ..... the distribution licensee in accordance with the provisions of the act. section 61 of the act stipulates that the ..... entered before 31^st march, 2008 for the period specified therein.29. before parting with the judgment we wish to record our appreciation for the karnataka electricity regulatory commission for issuing a comprehensive order for determination of tariff in respect of various renewable sources of energy. we also recognise the valuable .....

Tarini Infrastructure Limited Vs. Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. Though ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... distribution licensee; provided that the tariff approved by the commission including the ppas deemed to have been approved under sub-section (2) of section 27 of the karnataka electricity reforms act, 1999, prior to the coming into force of these regulations shall continue to apply for such period as mentioned in those ppas. . bare reading of ..... scc 283, travancore devaswom board vs. thanth international, (2004) 13 scc 44, s.a.p. devasthanam vs. sabapathi pillai, air 1962 mad. 132, eacoms controls (india) ltd. vs. bailey controls col. air (1998) del. 365 and ocean tramp tankers corporation vs. v/o sovfracht, (1964) 1 all er 161. each of the decisions is in respect ..... , rajasthan state mines and minerals ltd vs. eastern engg. enterprises, (1999)9 scc .a.p. devasthanam vs. sabapathipillai, air 1962 mad 132,eacoms controls (india) ltd. vs. bailey controls co, air (1988)del 365,andocean tramp tankers corporation vs. v/o sovfracht,(1964)1 all er 161 have been cited in support of the defence of .....

Ajmer Vidyut Viteran Nigam Limited, Rajasthan Vs. Rajasthan State Elec ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... review power. an erroneous decision cannot be reheard and corrected. 16. the object behind review has been well explained by supreme court in "s. nagaraj v. state of karnataka", 1993 suppl. (4) scc 595, wherein their lordships held as follows: justice is a virtue which transcends all barriers. neither the rules of procedure nor technicalities of ..... at the earliest possible time without driving the parties to the expense of an appeal or revision petition to which there would be no answer. (d) board of control for cricket, india and anr vs. netaji cricket club and ors reported in 2005 4 scc 741:, . ....an application for review would also be maintainable if ..... limited (r-2) filed a petition in petition no.227/2010 before the state commission under section 142 read with section 86 (1) (f) of the electricity act praying for immediate compliance of the orders of the state commission dated 4.11.2006 confirmed by the appellate tribunal. however, the state commission, after hearing the parties .....

Kanan Devan Hill Plantations Company Pvt. Ltd. Munnar and Others Vs. K ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... argued by the learned counsel for the appellant in the above two appeals that the decision in bangalore electricity supply company ltd. and ors. vs. karnataka electricity regulatory commission reported in 2009 elr (aptel) 1012 has not been followed. in this decision, it has been held that the determination of ..... state for different categories of consumers. thereafter the retail tariffs would reflect the relative efficiency of distribution companies in procuring power at competitive costs, controlling theft and reducing other distribution losses. 31. the above provision clearly suggests that uniform retail tariff is to be preferred within a state. para ..... with difference in consumer mix and load profile, are the reason for divergent profit levels for the licensees. as per the provisions of the act, the licensees should earn regulated profit commensurate with their performance thereby ensuring financial viability. national electricity policy and tariff policy states that state governments may .....

South India Sugar Mills Association, (Karnataka), Bangalore Vs. Karnat ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... the co-generation units attached to those factories is itself not maintainable in view of the fact that the appellant undisputedly is a society registered under the karnataka societies registration act, and an incorporeal body having capacity to sue and be sued. as we find from annexure b, c and d of the memorandum of appeal ..... of central electricity regulatory commission (terms and conditions for tariff determination for renewable energy sources) regulations, 2009 we find that for the first year of the control period 2009-10 the normative capital cost for non-fossil fuel based cogeneration project has been specified at rs. 4.45 crores which excludes the cost of ..... available before it. the state commission duly considered also the cerc regulations while coming to the decision in question. the rates fixed by the cerc for the control period is generic levelised generation tariff which cannot be applied ipso facto to the co-generators who are under the jurisdiction of the state commission. (xii) .....

Madhya Pradesh Power Generation Company Ltd Vs. Madhya Pradesh Electri ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... a court of law the reason should be elaborate. therefore, this decision is of no avail to mr. ramachandras client. 47. in state of karnataka and anr. vs. r. vivekanand swamy and another 2008 (5) scc 328 the question was of relaxation by the government of the medical reimbursement rules ..... regulations. the declared capacity of the generating unit may be zero, although the units are ready to run, due to factors beyond the appellants control. the appellant, therefore, is seeking a relaxation of their applicability to the appellants generating units. the appellant had also sought clarification from the state ..... its administrative jurisdiction, it controls and specifies the functions of the generating utilities, transmission utilities, distribution utilities and traders of electricity. normally, it does not have any concern with any individual consumer. its legislative function extends to bringing about different types of regulations pursuant to the provisions of the act and to carry out the .....

Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. Vs. Delhi Electricity Regulatory

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... supreme court held that "costs plus a reasonable return" is the reasonable, fair, just and proper method in fixation of price even under the control order.54. be it a postponement of return on equity or denial, so far as denial just to save the consumers from marginal increase in tariff ..... the service providers. the commission had in effect taken the role of controller instead of being a regulator to regulate and determine the consumer tariff by adopting the regulatory measure and mechanism. the object of der act 2000 and the electricity act 2003 has been lost sight by the derc.52. the reasonable ..... act 2000, in the absence of any regulations or statutory provisions the direction to create regulatory asset cannot be sustained. had a regulation been framed in this respect, the validity of such regulations has to be examined by appropriate forum.45. a reference is made to orders of tamil nadu electricity regulatory commission as well as the orissa electricity regulatory commission, karnataka .....