Absence of Restitution Clause Cannot Defeat Change in Law Claim: APTEL Applies “Penta-Test”
“Absence of any such clause in the PPA cannot be held to the prejudice of the appellant so as to deny relief to it under Change in Law clause.”
Power Purchase Agreement
DISCOMS must share coal shortage costs equally, cannot claim priority for power supply based either on prior date of agreement or coal source: Supreme Court
Supreme Court reaffirmed that none of the DISCOMs, including GRIDCO could claim priority for power supply based on the date of their agreements or based on any specific coal allocation reference. The principle to be followed was that coal supply must be proportionately allocated among the DISCOMs based on the quantum of energy supplied to them.
LPS terms under PPA remain binding on parties dehors subsequent tariff regulations: APTEL
“Any regulations issued by an Electricity Commission in exercise of its delegated legislative power, are applicable to the PPA executed after the date when those regulations come into force and cannot be applied to the PPAs already executed prior to that date, unless the regulations expressly specify so.”
2023 SCC Vol. 10 Part 3
Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003 — S. 25 r/w FR 56 — Tenure of Director of Enforcement: Permissibility of continuation of tenure
Explained| Supreme Court’s verdict on importance of interpreting commercial contracts in line with the original intent of parties involved
Supreme Court said that a deviation from the plain terms of the contract is warranted only when it serves business efficacy better
Supreme Court explains what qualifies as ‘Change in Law’; directs DISCOMS to compensate Power Generators for all additional charges levied by State instrumentalities
Supreme Court has requested the Union of India along with Ministry of Power to evolve a mechanism so as to ensure timely payment by the DISCOMS to the Generating Companies, which would avoid huge carrying cost to be passed over to the end consumers.
Supreme Court castigates APTEL for virtually rubber stamping State Commission’s findings on coercion vis-à-vis Power Purchase Agreement
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.”
Explained| Why Supreme Court dismissed MSEDCL’s appeal against compensation to Adani Power and GMR Warora Energy due to ‘Change in Law’?
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.
Delhi High Court| CERC does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate upon a dispute without Power Purchase Agreement
The Court rejected the contention forwarded by defendant 3 to the effect that the present issue had an impact on tariff, as the actions of the plaintiff had prevented the applicant from supplying power to defendant 3 under the PSA resulting into defendant 3 being forced to secure power from the open market at rates much higher than the tariff determined.
DECEMBER 2022 WRAP UP: 22 captivating judgments of Tribunals, Regulatory Bodies and Commissions
Presenting to you tour d’horizon of all the significant decisions covered in the month of December 2022 of the Tribunals, Commissions and Regulatory Bodies.
Principle that governs compensating a party for the time value for money would be applied for grant of interest on carrying cost on account of a change in law event; Appellate Tribunal for Electricity reiterates
The interest in ‘carrying cost' is nothing but time value for money and the only way a party can be afforded the benefit of restitution in every which way.
Bombay HC issues an ad interim order directing CGPL to not take further steps to invoke the Letter of Credit issued by Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd.
Bombay High Court: While deliberating upon the instant writ petition seeking temporary, time-limited relief so that the Letter of Credit is not
Supreme Court directs Haryana Discoms to pay compound interest on carrying cost to Adani Power from the date of Change of Law
Supreme Court: In a big win for Adani Power Limited, the 3-judge bench of NV Ramana, CJI and Krishna Murari and Hima