2010 Supreme(SC) 324

2010 (3) Supreme 78
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
G.S. Singhvi and Asok Kumar Ganguly, JJ.
Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board — Appellant
versus
Central Electricity Regulatory Commission and others — Respondents
Civil Appeal D. NO. 37598 of 2007
Decided on : 15-04-2010

IMPORTANT POINT
Section 5 of Limitation Act cannot be invoked by Apex Court for entertaining an appeal filed against the decision or order of Tribunal beyond period of 120 days specified in Section 125 of the Electricity Act and its proviso.

Headnote:Limitation Act, 1963- Section 5- Electricity Act, 2003 - Section 125- Dispute arose between appellant Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board and respondent No.3 - Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board in the matter of payment of FLEE charges to the beneficiaries in the Western Region under the “Frequency Linked Energy Exchange” scheme - Matter was considered by respondent No.1 - Central Electricity Regulatory Commission, which passed an order fixing the liability of the appellant and respondent No.3 in the matter of payment of FLEE charges-Appeal-Allowed by Tribunal-Soon thereafter, respondent No.3 filed an application for issue of a direction to respondent No.5 to recalculate FLEE charges in accordance with the Tribunal’s order in relation to post-reorganization period- Said application was allowed by Tribunal and directed respondent No.5 to recalculate FLEE charges –Against said order Appellant filed an Appeal - Along with said appeal, appellant filed an application for condonation of 160 days’ delay- Section 111(1) and (2) lays down that any person aggrieved by an order made by an adjudicating officer or an appropriate commission under Electricity Act may prefer an appeal to the Tribunal within a period of 45 days from the date on which a copy of the order made by an adjudicating officer or the appropriate commission is received by him- Section 111(5) mandates that the Tribunal shall deal with the appeal as expeditiously as possible and endeavour to dispose of the same finally within 180 days from date of receipt thereof- If the appeal is not disposed of within 180 days, Tribunal is required to record reasons in writing for not doing so-Section 125 lays down that any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the Tribunal can file an appeal to this Court within 60 days from the date of communication of the decision or order of the Tribunal- Proviso to Section 125 empowers this Court to entertain an appeal filed within a further period of 60 days if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing appeal within the initial period of 60 days- This shows that the period of limitation prescribed for filing appeals under Sections 111(2) and 125 is substantially different from the period prescribed under the Limitation Act for filing suits etc.- The use of the expression `within a further period of not exceeding 60 days’ in Proviso to Section 125 makes it clear that the outer limit for filing an appeal is 120 days-Held there is no provision in the Act under which this Court can entertain an appeal filed against the decision or order of the Tribunal after more than 120 days. (Para 11)

       Limitation Act, 1963- Section 5- Electricity Act, 2003 - Section 125- Whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 can be invoked by Apex Court for allowing the aggrieved person to file an appeal under Section 125 of the Electricity Act, 2003 after more than 120 days from the date of communication of the decision or order of the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity-Held that Section 5 of Limitation Act cannot be invoked by this Court for entertaining an appeal filed against the decision or order of Tribunal beyond period of 120 days specified in Section 125 of the Electricity Act and its proviso- Any interpretation of Section 125 of the Electricity Act which may attract applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act read with Section 29(2) thereof will defeat the object of the legislation, namely, to provide special limitation for filing an appeal against the decision or order of the Tribunal and proviso to Section 125 will become nugatory. (Para 16)

       Electricity Act, 2003 - Section 125-Appeal filed u/s 125 by appellant after 160 day’s delay-Even though the name of the counsel for the appellant was not shown in the cause list of 14.5.2007 i.e., the date on which the impugned order was pronounced by the Tribunal, factum of pronouncement was conveyed to parties including appellant vide letter dated 7.6.2007, which was signed by the Deputy Registrar on 11.6.2007 and they were informed that they can obtain copy through e-mail or make an application for certified copy- Undisputedly, that letter was received in the secretariat of the appellant on 21.6.2007-The appellant had come to know about the impugned order in July 2007 from another source i.e., respondent No.5, which had sent communication for payment of FLEE charges- The communication sent by respondent No.5 was received by the appellant on 17.7.2007- It is, thus, evident that on 21.6.2007 or at least on 17.7.2007, appellant had come to know through proper channel that order had been pronounced by the Tribunal -It was not clear from record whether the appellant had applied for certified copy or obtained the one through e-mail, but this much was evident that appellant did obtain/receive a copy of order dated 17.5.2007- If that was not so, appellant could not have filed appeal under Section 125 of the Electricity Act.- The preparation of appeal, which bears the date 7.9.2007 is a clinching evidence of the fact that the appellant had not only become aware of the order of the Tribunal, but had obtained copy thereof- However, instead of filing appeal within 60 days from the date of receipt of letter dated 7.6.2007 sent by the registry of the Tribunal or communication sent by respondent No.5, the appellant chose to file appeal only on 24.12.2007 and that too despite the fact that the same was prepared on 7.9.2007- Appellant had not offered any tangible explanation as to why the appeal could not be filed for more than three and half months after its preparation-Hence held that appeal had been filed after more than 120 days from the date of communication of the Tribunal’s order and, as such, the same could not be entertained. (Paras 24, 25)

       Electricity Act, 2003 - Section 125-Date of communication of the decision or order of the Tribunal for purpose of Section 125 of the Electricity Act-When arises- The word ‘communication’ has not been defined in the Act and the Rules- Therefore, the same deserves to be interpreted by applying the rule of contextual interpretation and keeping in view the language of the relevant provisions- Rule 94(1) of Rules lays down that Bench of the Tribunal which hears an application or petition shall pronounce the order immediately after conclusion of the hearing- Rule 94(2) deals with a situation where the order is reserved- In that event, the date for pronouncement of order is required to be notified in cause list and the same is treated as a notice of intimation of pronouncement- Rule 98(1) casts a duty upon the Court Master to immediately after pronouncement transmit the order along with the case file to the Deputy Registrar- In terms of Rule 98(2), the Deputy Registrar is required to scrutinize the file, satisfy himself that provisions of rules have been complied with and thereafter, send the case file to the Registry for taking steps to prepare copies of the order and their communication to parties- If Rule 98(2) is read in isolation, one may get an impression that the registry of the Tribunal is duty bound to send copies of the order to the parties and the order will be deemed to have been communicated on the date of receipt thereof, but if the same is read in conjunction with Section 125 of the Electricity Act, which enables any aggrieved party to file an appeal within 60 days from the date of communication of the decision or order of the Tribunal, Rule 94(2) which postulates notification of the date of pronouncement of the order in the cause list and Rule 106 under which the Tribunal can allow filing of an appeal or petition or application through electronic media and provide for rectification of the defects by e-mail or net, it becomes clear that once the factum of pronouncement of order by the Tribunal is made known to the parties and they are given opportunity to obtain a copy thereof through e-mail etc., the order will be deemed to have been communicated to the parties and the period of 60 days specified in the main part of Section 125 will commence from that date. (Para 18)

       Facts of the Case :

       Issue which arose for consideration in present appeal was Whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 can be invoked by Apex Court for allowing the aggrieved person to file an appeal under Section 125 of the Electricity Act, 2003 after more than 120 days from the date of communication of the decision or order of the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity.

       Findings of the Court :

       Section 5 of Limitation Act cannot be invoked by this Court for entertaining an appeal filed against the decision or order of Tribunal beyond period of 120 days specified in Section 125 of the Electricity Act and its proviso. Any interpretation of Section 125 of the Electricity Act which may attract applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act read with Section 29(2) thereof will defeat the object of the legislation, namely, to provide special limitation for filing an appeal against the decision or order of the Tribunal and proviso to Section 125 will become nugatory.