Without adequate notice, a unilateral change in contract terms is impermissible, especially concerning supply obligations.

JUDGMENT :

(Order of the Court was made by C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

The petitioner in O.P.No. 353 of 2020 which had been filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, aggrieved by the order dated 19.08.2020 of the learned Single Judge of this Court, is the appellant herein.

2. O.P.No. 353 of 2020 had been filed to set aside an arbitral award dated 31.01.2020 passed by the sole arbitrator. The respondent herein, Shree Karthik Papers Ltd., at Coimbatore, had filed a claim petition under Section 8(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking to refer to arbitration the disputes which had arisen with regard to an agreement dated 18.04.2018 entered into by them with the appellant herein, OPG Power Generation Pvt. Ltd. The agreement dated 18.04.2018 was a power supply agreement for a period of three years. The appellant, OPG Power Generation Pvt. Ltd., was the supplier of the electricity and the respondent herein Shree Karthik Papers Ltd., was the consumer.

3. In the agreement, the tariff had been set out for one year. Monthly bills had been raised computing the month from 28 to 27 of the succeeding month. The respondent had to effect payment within a period of 7 days from the date of the bill raised.

4. It had been contended that the bill for the month 28.08.2018 till 27.09.2018 was raised on 01.10.2018. It was further contended that the appellant had stopped supply of power on and from 28.09.2018. The respondent had to procure power from TANGEDCO at a higher rate resulting in loss. Contending that this abrupt stoppage of power was a breach of the contract and in view of the fact that there was a clause in the agreement to refer the disputes to arbitration, the respondent had filed a claim petition before the arbitrator under Section 8(1) of the Act. The respondent had laid a claim for a sum of Rs.51,55,488/- towards excess power charges from 28.09.2018 till 23.03.2019 and also for interest on the increased amount deposited before TANGEDCO as on 08.10.2018 as damages and also sought interest at 12% p.a., on the said amounts from 09.10.2018 till date of realisation. The sole arbitrator passed an award on 31.01.2020 granting a sum of Rs.40,82,400/- as the amount incurred by the respondent towards excess power charges for the period from 28.09.2018 to 23.03.2019 and also for interest on the increased amount of deposit to TANGEDCO as damages. It was also held that the appellant was liable to pay interest at 12% p.a., from the respective dates for payment and not from 09.10.2018 and from 29.03.2019 which was the last date for payment. It was also held that the respondent was entitled for interest at 12% p.a., on the sum of Rs.9,68,490/- from 23.05.2019 which was the additional security deposit paid by the respondent to TANGEDCO.

5. Challenging this award, the appellant had filed O.P.No. 353 of 2020 under Section 34(2)(b)(ii) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to set aside the arbitral award. By order dated 19.08.2020, the learned Single Judge of this Court had dismissed the said Original Petition, necessitating filing of the present Appeal.

6. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant had the right to revise the price under certain circumstances. Accordingly, after due information, it was communicated that there would be increase in the price from the next billing cycle which was from the 28th of that particular month till the 27 of the succeeding month. It had been further contended that the appellant was to supply and the respondent was to purchase 0.216 lakhs unit of electricity per day. The agreement also provided that if the respondent failed to pay