Special Appeal Maintainable If Single Judge's Order Relates To Authority Acting Without Statutory Appellate Jurisdiction: Allahabad High Court Recall Of Witness For Cross-Examination Permissible On Newly Framed Issue Post-Remand Even If Disposal Timeline Is Fixed: Karnataka High Court Litigant Cannot Overcome Law Of Limitation By Shifting Blame On Counsel Through Inconsistent Stands: Madras High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Preventive Detention Not Warranted If Person Can Be Dealt With Under Ordinary Laws; No Effort To Arrest In Pending Cases: Supreme Court Writ Petition Cannot Be Dismissed On ‘Forum Non Conveniens’ If Respondent's Office Is Within Court's Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Supreme Court Doubts 'Sajjan Singh' Ruling; Refers To Larger Bench Whether Third Judge Can Re-examine Unanimous Findings Under Section 392 CrPC SARFAESI Sale Vitiated If Balance 75% Bid Amount Is Paid Beyond 15 Days Without Written Extension Agreement: Supreme Court Delhi High Court Can't Refuse Writ Petition Against BSF Dismissal Merely Because Cause Of Action Arose Outside Delhi: Supreme Court Private Rights Must Yield To Public Interest: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs Removal Of Encroachments On Public Road Review Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Re-Agitate Factual Disputes Or Seek Re-Hearing On Merits: Allahabad High Court Recovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act Vitiated If Police Already Present At Spot Before Arrival Of Panch Witnesses: Bombay High Court Mere Non-Compliance Or Delay In Procedure Under Section 52A NDPS Act Is An Irregularity, Not An Illegality Entitling Accused To Bail: Calcutta High Court Recovery Of Weapon Used In Commission Of Offence Not A Sine Qua Non For Conviction If Ocular Evidence Is Corroborated: Allahabad High Court Seized Vehicles Shouldn't Be Kept Idle To Rot In Police Stations, Utility Vanishes Due To Stagnation: Karnataka High Court Or 39 CPC | Trial Court Erred In Dismissing Injunction Application Despite Respondent's 'No Objection' To Restraining Share Transfer: Gauhati High Court Issuing NBW Merely For Absence Of Accused Already On Bail Is Improper; Liberty Cannot Be Dealt With Lightly: Orissa High Court 138 NI | Expert Examination Of Disputed Documents Essential For Just Adjudication If Complainant Denies Handwriting & Signatures: Rajasthan High Court Order 41 Rule 27 CPC Cannot Be Invoked To Fill Lacunae In Evidence If Party Voluntarily Closed Evidence In Trial Court: Delhi High Court

Indian Supreme Court Settles Contentious Electricity Tariff Case Between Nabha Power and Punjab State Power

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a groundbreaking ruling, India's Supreme Court has settled a prolonged conflict concerning deductions in monthly electricity tariffs under the Electricity Act, 2003. The case pitted Nabha Power Limited against Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and has been presided over by Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sudhanshu Dhulia, and Aravind Kumar. The verdict is poised to influence a host of similar cases going forward.

Originating from a labyrinth of legal procedures that involved various judicial bodies, from the Regulatory Commission to the Appellate Tribunal and ultimately, the Supreme Court, the case has now reached its conclusion. Citing the 2018 case between the same parties, the Court extended relief to Nabha Power concerning the washing costs of coal and the determination of its Gross Calorific Value (GCV).

Furthermore, the Court dealt with contempt charges against Punjab State Power for failing to adhere to prior payment orders. The Court mandated installment payments by the respondent and also gave them the discretion to present future grievances. This led Punjab State Power to submit a new petition to the Regulatory Commission for approval to recoup the paid amounts.

In a move that highlighted the Court’s disapproval of any attempts to sidestep legal obligations, the judges observed that such tactics "can neither be appreciated nor left without consequences." Nabha Power had vehemently opposed reopening any settled matters, arguing that these were maneuvers by Punjab State Power to escape their payment duties under a 2017 judgment.

Remarkably, the Court also allocated legal fees to the appellants, Nabha Power Limited and Talwandi Sabo Power Limited, setting them at Rs. 40 lakhs and Rs. 25 lakhs, respectively.

After six years of protracted legal battles, this landmark decision sets a vital precedent in matters of contractual obligations. It underlines the importance of compliance with judicial orders and the repercussions of trying to bypass them.

The ruling is a clear indication of the Supreme Court’s steadfast commitment to uphold justice and ensures timely compliance with its decisions. The judgment is set to have a considerable ripple effect on upcoming cases, especially within the energy sector.

Date of Decision: October 09, 2023

NABHA POWER LIMITED  vs PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED   

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/09-Oct-2023-NABHA-POWER-LIMITED-Vs-PSPCL.pdf"]

Latest Legal News