contention that RGPPL
should have challenged the unilateral termination is preposterous; RGPPL had
promptly repudiated the termination and continued to do so through several ... Page 8 of 172
wrong, one by engaging in a unilateral termination, two, by claiming that it is for
RGPPL to go and challenge such
proceedings were again initiated in March and July 2019 leading to a
termination Order on 30.10.2019, whereas the Board had only granted time
till April ... till July 2018, the
project could not progress due to the wrongful encashment of the Bank
guarantee on the basis that there was a default
Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Limited vs Gujarat Electricity Regulatory ... on 9 November, 2023
Author: Ramesh
Punjab State Power Corporation Limited vs Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam ... on 30 May, 2023
Fatehgarh Bhadla Transmission Company ... vs Central Electricity Regulatory ... on 2 May, 2023
Author: Ramesh Ranganathan
Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam ... vs Central Electricity Regulatory ... on 2 February, 2024
Author: Ramesh
Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Limited vs Taxus Infrastructure & Power Projects ... on 27 May, 2024
North Karanpura Transmission Company ... vs Central Electricity Regulatory ... on 23 February, 2023
Author: Ramesh Ranganathan
dated
25.02.2020; the Petitioner should have mentioned this event in the 1st
termination notice itself; SECI had submitted that the Petitioner had not
submitted requisite ... MNRE had issued OM dated 13.08.2020; the Petitioner had issued 2nd
termination notice dated 05.03.2021; MNRE, in the interest of renewable
power developers, had provided
Teesta Urja Limited (Now Sikkim Urja ... vs Central Electricity Regulatory ... on 17 August, 2023
Author
