Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme court was of the opinion that the “casual approach of APTEL, in not reasoning how such findings could be rendered, cannot be countenanced. As a judicial tribunal, dealing with contracts and bargains, which are entered into by parties with equal bargaining power, APTEL is not expected to casually render findings of coercion, or fraud, without proper pleadings or proof, or without probing into evidence.”

Case BriefsSupreme Court

The Supreme Court upheld the judgement passed by the APTEL after observing that the generating companies were entitled to compensation so as to restore them to the same economic position, if the Change in Law had not occurred.

Legal RoundUpTribunals/Regulatory Bodies/Commissions Monthly Roundup

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR ELECTRICITY (ATE) Bureau of Energy Efficiency takes suo motu verification test on a sample refrigerator of Whirlpool India and