Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
..... the lis or proceeding cannot confer any further sanctity or authority and validity when it is shown and found to obviously and patently lack 69. in order to establish the relevance of part iv of the dvc act for tariff determination of generation and supply of electricity, we have examined the provisions made in part iv. the said ..... the above decision, regulation 21(ii) of the regulations will have to be ignored, being contrary to section 40 of the dvc act. on parity of reasoning, sections 38 and 39 of the dvc act that deal with payment of interest and interest charges and other expenses to be added to and receipts taken for reduction of capital cost ..... likely to suffer substantial loss and this is not considered to be in public interest, especially in the light of the socio-economic activities entrusted to the petitioner corporation. 39. we have given our thoughtful consideration to the issue. we find some merit in the contentions of the petitioner. firstly, we are in agreement that it would .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
..... the tariff order dated june 20, 2008). 5) mr. ramachandran, learned counsel appearing for the appellant stated that the decision of the commission is patently contrary to the provisions of the electricity act, 2003, the national tariff policy notified by the central government and the principles well settled by this tribunal in a number of cases. 6) ..... map for such reduction as per tariff policy is to be notified by the commission. 10) mr. ramachandran contended that despite the above specific provisions in the electricity act, 2003, the national tariff policy and the decisions of the tribunal, the commission, in the impugned order has; (a) increased the level of cross-subsidy substantially ..... the level of cross subsidization increasing substantially. the average cost of supply, as worked out by the commission has increased by only about 6.76% from rs. 3.39 per kwh to rs. 3.62 per kwh. for the new category ht-ii commercial, tariff has been fixed at about 220% of the average cost of supply .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
..... the appellant when aggrieved had also the recourse of filing an appeal available to him under section 111 of the act. it is a well settled law that power of review can be exercised only for corrections of a patent error of law or fact which stares in the face without any elaborate arguments being needed for establishing it. ..... 38. we have already held (supra) that the commission ought to have adopted normative debt repayment formula for determining interest on loan capital. the same view is reiterated.39. gravamen of the grievance of the appellant in this appeal is that the commission has determined the capital cost of rs. 300.59 crores (including wcm) only on ..... as under: mr. santanu mukherjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, in assailing the judgment and order dated 14.10.2004 in civil appeal no. 39 of 2005, would submit that the high court committed a serious error in entertaining the respondents' first appeal inasmuch as at the time of filing thereof, the original .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
..... 1987 delhi 219. this judgment of the high court, rendered in the case of h.d.shourie vs. municipal corporation of delhi, was subject to a letter patent appeal and the division bench of the high court dismissed the appeal (which is reported in 1994(1) ad delhi 105). 42) that judgment deals with ..... ) transmission of electricity; (c) wheeling of electricity; (d) retail sale of electricity . (2) .. (3) the appropriate commission shall not, while determining the tariff under this act, show undue preference to any consumer of electricity but may differentiate according to the consumers load factor, power factor, voltage, total consumption of electricity during any specified period of ..... 2, rsmml. the minimum charge is deemed consumption by the respondent no. 2 and is required to be paid to supplement the fixed cost of licensee. 39. it is observed that the commission in the impugned order has referred to its order in case of m/s balakrishan industries vs. jvvnl in respect of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
..... the appellant in view of the statutory mandate of non-discriminatory open access to be provided of the transmission net work as referred to in section 39 of the electricity act, 2003. in any event, the finances of the respondent no.1 and its promoter for the relevant preceding 3 years before the application for ..... appeal is this: whether paschimanchal vidyut vitaran nigam ltd, the first respondent herein, has satisfied all the mandatory requirements as provided in section 14 of the electricity act read with the provisions of the distribution of electricity licence (additional requirement of capital adequacy, credit worthiness and code of conduct) rules, 2005, the up electricity ..... condition of minimum area can be ignored. the interpretation by the state commission is patently wrong as it would be against the spirit of the scheme and spirit of the statutory provisions due to misunderstanding of the scheme of the act as well as the other provisions contained in the rules and the policy. however, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction
..... we are taking a lenient view of the lapse on the part of the respondent in the matter of levying penalty on the respondent herein. however, the patent illegality committed by the respondent cannot be overlooked and for this reason, commission is of the view that imposing a token penalty is necessary. the respondent shall ..... the documents available on record, indicated to the contrary. the regulatory commission passed such an order without conducting any investigation as per section 128 of the electricity act, 2003. (e) the state commission has not appreciated the provisions of the tn electricity distribution standards of performance regulations correctly. the mandatory information sought for by ..... passed on 31.1.2013 there is no material placed by the appellant to show that it has taken sincere efforts to address the concern of the petitioner. 39. in the light of the above circumstances, the state commission has passed the following order: in the result, we are of the considered view that .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
..... not to detract from the great weight to be given to the language actually used by that most distinguished judge." 10. in home office v. dorset yacht co. (1970 (2) all er 294) lord reid said, "lord atkin's speech.....is not to be treated as if it was a statute definition it will require qualification in new ..... code is also reproduced below: introduction in exercise of powers conferred by section 50 and 181 read with sections 43 to 48, 50, 55 59, of the electricity act 2003 (act 36 of 2003), the up electricity regulatory commission, after previous publication, hereby makes the following code, namely: short title and objectives 1.1 the electricity supply code 2005 ..... present case the appellant wants to recover the alleged loss caused to it during 1997-1998 which is not permissible under law. 39. the appellant has relied upon section 26 and 28 of the up electricity reforms act 1999 which, as per the appellant, entitles him for compensation for the loss it had suffered at the hands of the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
..... in air 1961 sc 218, manohar lal chopra vs seth hira lal reported in air 1962 sc 527, nain singh vs koonwarjee reported in (1970) 1 sc 732 and held that section 151 is intended to apply where the code does not cover any particular procedural aspect, and interest of ..... madras high court, while the honble supreme court upheld the vires of the rules saying that it does not offend the act or the constitution. this rule 39 dealt with power of relaxation which has been a matter of concern for the client of mr. ramachandran. their lordships held at ..... in (2010) 8 scc 1 (g) padam sen v/s state of up air 1219,and (h) nain singh v/s. koonwarjee reported in (1970) 1 scc 735. 13. the pleadings of the parties bring us to the following issues: a) is the appeal maintainable in its present form and ..... 1 unit 1: 06.10.1967 unit 2: 21.03.1968 unit 3: 14.05.1968 unit 4: 10.07.1968 unit 5: 21.03.1970 42 years 5. satpura thermal power station (stps) power house-ii unit 6: 27.06.1979 unit 7: 20.09.1980 30 years 6. .....
Tag this Judgment!