Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 30 (1.20 seconds)

Tamil Nadu Generation And Distribution vs Central Electricity Regulatory ... on 12 August, 2021

This Hon'ble Tribunal by its judgment dated 13.04.2018 passed in Appeal No. 210 of 2017 titled Adani Power Ltd. vs CERC & Ors., considering the restitutionary principle under the change in law provision of the PPA allowed carrying cost on the allowed change in law claims from the effective date of change in law till the approval of the said claim by the appropriate authority. Relevant extract of Adani Judgment is as under: -
Appellate Tribunal For Electricity Cites 33 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Coastal Gujarat Power Limited vs Central Electricity Regulatory ... on 27 April, 2021

162. Placing reliance on the restitutionary principle in-built in Article 13 of the PPA and the judgment of Supreme Court in Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. & Anr. v. Adani Power Ltd. & Ors. (2019) 5 SCC 325 upholding the judgment of this tribunal in Adani Power Limited v. CERC & Ors.: 2018 ELR (APTEL) 0556, the appellant presses its claim of carrying cost stating that the same has been unjustly denied by CERC.
Appellate Tribunal For Electricity Cites 58 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

M/S Gmr Warora Energy Ltd.(Gwel) vs Central Electricity Regulatory ... on 14 August, 2018

xiii. Now we have reached to the final issue raised by GWEL related to carrying cost on the allowed Change in Law events. For the sake of brevity we are not discussing the claims of GWEL and counter claims of the Discom/Prayas Energy Group on this issue as the said issue has been decided by this Tribunal vide judgement dated 13.4.2018 in Appeal No. 210 of 2017 in case of Adani Power Ltd. v. CERC wherein this Tribunal after detailed analysis has allowed carrying cost on the allowable Change in Law events. We straight way come to the relevant portion of the said judgement which is reproduced below:
Appellate Tribunal For Electricity Cites 70 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

M/S. Adani Power Rajasthan Ltd vs Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory ... on 14 August, 2018

iii. APRL has submitted that this Tribunal has allowed indirect taxes vide judgement dated 19.4.2017 in case of Sasan Power Ltd. v. CERC in Appeal No. 161 of 2015 and excise duty has been allowed by CERC in order dated 6.2.2017 in case of Adani Power Ltd. v. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and order dated 1.2.2017 in case of Emco Energy Ltd. v. MSEDCL and no appeal has been filed against these orders. Counsel for the APRL/Appellant has further submitted that the order dated 29.12.2015 has not been challenged by the Discoms.
Appellate Tribunal For Electricity Cites 66 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Maharashtra State Electricity ... vs Central Electricity Regulatory ... on 16 July, 2021

The principle that the reference GCV for the purposes of change in law compensation is to be the actual GCV as settled by Sasan Judgment (supra) and GMR Order (supra) has been reiterated. It has been observed that there is no guidance in the PPAs or in the Bidding Guidelines as to the reference GCV that should be applied in case of change in law claims in Case 1 bid projects where SHR or GCV is not a bid parameter. It is noted that the overarching principle for change in law compensation is that the generating company should not be left in a worse economic position."
Appellate Tribunal For Electricity Cites 17 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Adani Power Rajasthan Ltd vs Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory ... on 18 April, 2024

325); it was clear that the restitutionary principles encapsulated in Article 13.2 would take effect for computing the impact of change in law; there was no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment (Adani Power (Mundra) Ltd. v. CERC, 2021 SCC OnLine APTEL 67), wherein it has been held by the Appellate Tribunal that Respondent-Adani Power had started claiming change in law event compensation in respect of installation of FGD unit along with carrying cost, right from the year 2012, and that it had approached several fora to get this claim settled; Respondent-Adani Power finally succeeded in getting compensation towards FGD unit only on 28-3-2018, but the carrying cost claim was denied; the relief relating to carrying cost was granted to Respondent- Adani Power by the Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 13-4-2018 (Adani Power Ltd. v. CERC, 2018 SCC OnLine APTEL 5) which was upheld by the Supreme Court on 25-2-2019 (Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. v. Adani Power Ltd., (2019) 5 SCC 325); once carrying cost was granted in favour of Respondent-Adani Power, it could not be urged by the appellants that interest on carrying cost should be calculated on simple interest basis, instead of compound interest basis; grant of compound interest on carrying cost, and that too from the date of occurrence of the change in law event, was based on sound logic; the idea behind granting interest on carrying cost was not far to see; it was aimed at restituting a party that was adversely affected by a change in law event, and to restore it to its original economic position as if such a change in law event had not taken place.
Appellate Tribunal For Electricity Cites 38 - Cited by 0 - R Ranganathan - Full Document

Nrss Xxxi (B) Transmission Limited vs Central Electricity Regulatory ... on 3 December, 2021

17.2 Shri Pradeep Mishra, Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 2 submitted that the decision dated 20.11.2019 in Appeal No. 121 of 2015; Sasan Power Ltd. Vs. CERC &Ors. of this Tribunal is not Page 88 of 100 Judgment in A.No.129 of 2020 & 276 of 2021 applicable in the present case as the PGCIL vide its letter dated 04.07.2014 had informed the Petitioner as there may be change in north coordinate by few meters during detailed Engineering. Further, submitted that due to any fault on behalf of Appellant or PGCIL the replying Respondent cannot be penalized by making them to pay the higher tariff.
Appellate Tribunal For Electricity Cites 17 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1   2 3 Next