138 NI Act | Admission Of Signatures On Cheque Triggers Statutory Presumption Of Debt: Punjab & Haryana HC Magistrate Cannot Straightaway Issue NBW For Non-Appearance If Accused Is Already On Bail; Bail Valid Until Cancelled: Orissa High Court Bank Cannot Dishonour Cheques Merely Because Account Title Changed From Partnership To Proprietorship: Madhya Pradesh High Court Environmental Clearance Is Site-Specific; Violations At Different Site By Related Entity Not Ground To Deny New EC: Kerala High Court Advocate’s Failure To Formally Prove Fee Bill Not Fatal To Claim If Oral Evidence Establishes Non-Payment Of Agreed Professional Fees: Delhi High Court Police Officers Cannot Fight Over Specific Postings; Disciplined Force Must Prioritize Public Interest Over Location: Karnataka High Court RERA Section 18 Interest For Delayed Possession Is An Unqualified Absolute Right; Notice Under Section 55 Contract Act Not Required: Bombay High Court State Cannot Hand Over Additional Charge Of Sensitive Posts To Tainted Officers Facing Disciplinary Action: Madhya Pradesh High Court Mandatory Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Essential If Accused Resides Outside Jurisdiction; Commercial Breach Not Criminal Offence: Calcutta High Court Disciplinary Enquiry Cannot Be Quashed Merely For Delay In Conclusion; 6-Month Timeline Under G.O.Ms.No.679 Is Directory: Andhra Pradesh High Court Exoneration In Adjudication Proceedings No Bar To Criminal Prosecution If CBI Collects Independent Evidence Of Forgery & Conspiracy: Bombay High Court Public Prosecutor Not A 'Post Office' Of Investigating Agency; Independent Application Of Mind Mandatory For Extending Remand Beyond 180 Days Under NDPS Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Complainant Cannot Use Section 311 CrPC To Reopen Pre-Charge Stage After Explicit Waiver & Framing Of Charges: Allahabad High Court Bomb Blast In Train Is An 'Accident' Under Railways Act, Union Of India Liable To Pay Compensation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Bail Hearing Can Proceed In Informant's Absence If Notice Was Served Despite Section 483(2) BNSS Mandate: Allahabad High Court

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Power Companies, Rejects Coercion Claims in Power Purchase Agreements

03 September 2024 10:33 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling today, the Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment upholding the validity of Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) entered into by power companies and rejecting allegations of coercion and unequal bargaining power. The judgment, delivered by a bench comprising Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Justice S. Ravindra Bhat, and Justice M. M. Sundresh, provides crucial clarity on the applicability of amendments to pre-existing contracts in the electricity sector.

The Supreme Court categorically stated, "The PPAs entered into by the parties before the Second Amendment to the Renewable Energy Certificate (REC) Regulations were not affected by its terms." The court further emphasized that the respondents' claims of coercion lacked evidence and specific details, and criticized the Appellate Tribunal for failing to provide proper reasoning in endorsing such findings.

Under the REC Mechanism, power companies sold electricity to distribution licensees at a mutually agreed price, not exceeding the Average Power Purchase Cost (APPC) of the DISCOMs. The companies also benefited from the trading of Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) in the Power Exchange, which provided additional revenues. The respondents argued that the PPAs they had entered into were less advantageous than the preferential tariff determined by the state commission.

Justice Kaul clarified, "Unless any later amendment expressly overrides existing contracts, the terms of such agreements bind the parties." The court emphasized that PPAs were the result of voluntary negotiations between parties with equal bargaining power and within the framework of existing regulations.

The judgment, setting aside the concurrent findings and orders of the State Commission and the Appellate Tribunal, concluded, "The appeals are allowed, with costs payable to the appellants."

Date of Decision: April 13, 2023

GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED & ORS. vs RENEW WIND ENERGY

Latest Legal News