Electricity Act, 2003 Archives

Supreme Court settles liability for previous electricity dues in auction sales: Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited vs. Srigdhaa Beverages (2020) INSC 368

June 1, 2020 / Auction Sales, Electricity Act, 2003, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 56, Electricity Dues, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, SARFAESI Act, 2002, Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002

Supreme Court settles liability for previous electricity dues in auction sales: Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited vs. Srigdhaa Beverages (2020) INSC 368 Date of the Judgment: June 01, 2020 Citation: (2020) INSC 368 Judges: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J. and K.M. Joseph, J. Can an auction purchaser be held liable for the previous electricity […]

Supreme Court settles liability for previous electricity dues in auction sales: Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited vs. Srigdhaa Beverages (2020) INSC 368 Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Regulatory Authority’s Decision on Power Purchase Agreement: CLP India vs. Gujarat Urja (2020)

May 6, 2020 / Arun Mishra, Contract Law, Contractual Obligations, Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 with Section 43A, Judges, Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs), S. Ravindra Bhat, Tariff Determination, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Upholds Regulatory Authority’s Decision on Power Purchase Agreement: CLP India vs. Gujarat Urja (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Applicability of amended tariff notifications to existing Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs). CASE TYPE: Electricity Law, Contract Law, Regulatory Law. Case Name: CLP India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. & Anr. [Judgment Date]: May 6,

Supreme Court Upholds Regulatory Authority’s Decision on Power Purchase Agreement: CLP India vs. Gujarat Urja (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles dispute on electricity disconnection and minimum guarantee charges: Bihar State Electricity Board vs. M/S Iceberg Industries Ltd. (27 April 2020)

April 27, 2020 / Aniruddha Bose, Consumer Grievance Redressal, Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum, Consumer Law, Consumer Rights, Deepak Gupta, Electricity Act, 2003, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 2(15), Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 56, Judges

Supreme Court settles dispute on electricity disconnection and minimum guarantee charges: Bihar State Electricity Board vs. M/S Iceberg Industries Ltd. (2020) Date of the Judgment: 27 April 2020 Citation: 2020 INSC 348 Judges: Deepak Gupta, J., Aniruddha Bose, J. Can an electricity board disconnect power supply to a consumer for non-payment of dues, even if

Supreme Court settles dispute on electricity disconnection and minimum guarantee charges: Bihar State Electricity Board vs. M/S Iceberg Industries Ltd. (27 April 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court on Wheeling Charges: Sai Wardha Power Generation Ltd. vs. Tata Power Company Ltd. (2020)

April 3, 2020 / Deepak Gupta, Electricity Act, 2003, Electricity Laws, Electricity Laws with Section 2(72), Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Transmission and Distribution, Wheeling Charges

Supreme Court on Wheeling Charges: Sai Wardha Power Generation Ltd. vs. Tata Power Company Ltd. (2020) Date of the Judgment: April 03, 2020 Citation: Non-Reportable, Civil Appeal No. 2228/2020 (@ Diary No. 24669 of 2019) Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J., Deepak Gupta, J. Can a power distribution company charge wheeling fees for electricity supplied through

Supreme Court on Wheeling Charges: Sai Wardha Power Generation Ltd. vs. Tata Power Company Ltd. (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Use of ‘Architect’ Title Under Architects Act: Council of Architecture vs. Mukesh Goyal (2020)

March 17, 2020 / Ajay Rastogi, Architects Act, 1972, Architects Act, 1972 with Section 37, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Judges, Registration of Architects, Regulatory Bodies, Regulatory Law, Service Regulations

Supreme Court Clarifies Use of ‘Architect’ Title Under Architects Act: Council of Architecture vs. Mukesh Goyal (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether Section 37 of the Architects Act, 1972, prohibits individuals not registered with the Council of Architecture from practicing architecture or merely restricts the use of the title “Architect”. CASE TYPE: Regulatory/Service Law Case Name: Council

Supreme Court Clarifies Use of ‘Architect’ Title Under Architects Act: Council of Architecture vs. Mukesh Goyal (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Differential Electricity Tariffs for Self-Financing Educational Institutions: Kerala State Electricity Board vs. Principal Sir Syed Institute (20 February 2020)

February 20, 2020 / Aniruddha Bose, Deepak Gupta, Educational Institutions, Electricity Act, 2003, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 62, Electricity Tariff, Government Aided Educational Institutions, Judges, Natural Justice, Quasi-Judicial Proceedings, Self-Financing Educational Institutions, Tariff Determination, Tariff Fixation, Tariff Orders

Supreme Court Upholds Differential Electricity Tariffs for Self-Financing Educational Institutions: Kerala State Electricity Board vs. Principal Sir Syed Institute Date of the Judgment: 20 February 2020 Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: Deepak Gupta, J., Aniruddha Bose, J. Can electricity tariffs for educational institutions vary based on whether they are self-financing or government-aided? The Supreme

Supreme Court Upholds Differential Electricity Tariffs for Self-Financing Educational Institutions: Kerala State Electricity Board vs. Principal Sir Syed Institute (20 February 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the meaning of “first due” under Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003 in cases of incorrect billing: Assistant Engineer (D1), Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited & Anr. vs. Rahamatullah Khan alias Rahamjulla (18 February 2020)

February 18, 2020 / Consumer Law, Consumer Rights, Electricity Act, 2003, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 56, Indu Malhotra, Judges, Limitation Law, Limitation Period, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Clarifies “First Due” Date Under Electricity Act: Ajmer Vidyut Nigam vs. Rahamatullah Khan (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of “first due” in Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003, concerning the limitation period for disconnection of electricity supply due to non-payment of dues. CASE TYPE: Electricity Law, Consumer Law. Case Name: Assistant Engineer (D1),

Supreme Court clarifies the meaning of “first due” under Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003 in cases of incorrect billing: Assistant Engineer (D1), Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited & Anr. vs. Rahamatullah Khan alias Rahamjulla (18 February 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of arbitration under the Electricity Act in a dispute between a licensee and consumer: Hindustan Zinc vs. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam (2019)

December 4, 2019 / Aniruddha Bose, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Dispute Resolution, Electricity Act, 2003, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 42, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 86, Judges, Rohinton Fali Nariman, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Clarifies Arbitration Scope under Electricity Act: Hindustan Zinc vs. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam (2019) Date of the Judgment: December 04, 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 1148 Judges: Rohinton Fali Nariman, J., Aniruddha Bose, J., V. Ramasubramanian, J. Can a dispute between a power distribution company and a consumer be resolved through arbitration under the

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of arbitration under the Electricity Act in a dispute between a licensee and consumer: Hindustan Zinc vs. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds APERC’s Power to Determine Wheeling and Grid Support Charges: Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Limited vs. M/S Rain Calcining Limited & Others (29 November 2019)

November 29, 2019 / Andhra Pradesh Electricity Reforms Act, 1998, Arun Mishra, B.R. Gavai, Electricity Act, 2003, Electricity Law, Judges, M.R. Shah, Regulatory Law, Regulatory Powers, Tariff Determination

Supreme Court Upholds APERC’s Power to Determine Wheeling and Grid Support Charges: Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Limited vs. M/S Rain Calcining Limited & Others (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission (APERC) has the authority to determine wheeling charges and grid support charges under the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Reforms Act, 1998.

Supreme Court Allows Electricity Transmission Line Construction Subject to Compensation: Century Rayon vs. IVP Limited (2019)

November 27, 2019 / Electricity Act, 2003, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 164, Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 with Section 10, Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 with Section 16, Judges, Krishna Murari, N.V. Ramana, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court Allows Electricity Transmission Line Construction Subject to Compensation: Century Rayon vs. IVP Limited (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an interim injunction can be granted to restrain the construction of electricity transmission towers on private land when the District Magistrate has granted permission under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, subject to compensation. CASE TYPE: Civil

Supreme Court Allows Electricity Transmission Line Construction Subject to Compensation: Century Rayon vs. IVP Limited (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Modifies NGT Order on Environmental Compensation: Tata Power Delhi vs. Manoj Misra (2019)

October 24, 2019 / Delhi Electricity Reforms Act, 2000, Electricity Act, 2003, Electricity Law, Hemant Gupta, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 with Section 14, National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 with Section 15, National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 with Section 18(1)

Supreme Court Modifies NGT Order on Environmental Compensation: Tata Power Delhi vs. Manoj Misra (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an electricity distribution company can be directed to collect environmental compensation through electricity bills. CASE TYPE: Environmental Law, National Green Tribunal Case Name: Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd. vs. Manoj Misra and Ors. Judgment Date: 24 October

Supreme Court Modifies NGT Order on Environmental Compensation: Tata Power Delhi vs. Manoj Misra (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Quashes FIR After Lok Adalat Settlement in Electricity Theft Case: Saleem Ahmed vs. State & Anr. (2019) INSC 738 (19 August 2019)

August 19, 2019 / Abhay Manohar Sapre, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 482, Electricity Act, 2003, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 135, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 152, Electricity Theft, Finality of Lok Adalat Settlement, Judges, Lok Adalat, Quashing of FIR, R. Subhash Reddy, Settlement in Lok Adalat

Supreme Court Quashes FIR After Lok Adalat Settlement in Electricity Theft Case Date of the Judgment: 19 August 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 738 Judges: Abhay Manohar Sapre, J., R. Subhash Reddy, J. Can a criminal case be pursued after a settlement has been reached in Lok Adalat? The Supreme Court of India addressed this important

Supreme Court Quashes FIR After Lok Adalat Settlement in Electricity Theft Case: Saleem Ahmed vs. State & Anr. (2019) INSC 738 (19 August 2019) Read Post »