IN THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR ELECTRICITY (Appellate Jurisdiction)

EXECUTION PETITION NO. 11 OF 2023 Dated: 2^nd July, 2024 Present: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ramesh Ranganathan, Chairperson Hon’ble Ms. Seema Gupta, Technical Member (Electricity)

In the matter of:

M/s Clearsky Solar Private Limited Through its Director, 8-2-268/2/B/3, Road No. 2, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad – 500 034. … Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

1. Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission Through its Secretary, No. 16, Millers Tank Bed Area, Vasanth nagar, Bengaluru – 560 052. ... Respondent No.1

2. Gulbarga Electricity Supply Company Limited Through its Managing Director, Station road, Kalburagi – 585012. ... Respondent No.2

3. Karnataka Renewable Energy Development Limited Through its Managing Director, No. 39, “Shanthi Gruha”

Bharat Scouts & Guides Building Palace Road, Bengaluru – 560001. ... Respondent No.3

4. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited Through its Managing Director, Corporate Office, Kaveri Bhavan, K.G. Road, Bengaluru – 560 009. ... Respondent No.4

5. State of Karnataka Through its Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Energy Room No. 236, 2^nd Floor, Vikas Soudha, … Respondent No. 5 Bengaluru, PIN – 560001.

Counsel on record for the Petitioner : Hemant Sahai Shreshth Ramesh Sharma Nitish Gupta Molshree Bhatnagar Surbhi Sharma Nipun Sharma Nishant Talwar Parichita Chowdhury Nimesh jha Neel Kandan Rahate Deepak Thakur Rishabh Sehgal Manpreet Singh Aanchal Seth Shubham Singh Varnika Tyagi Kamya Sharma Counsel on record for the Respondent(s) : Arunav Patnaik Bhabna Das for Res.2 Praveen G. Adagatti Sharanagouda Patil for Res.3 Prateek Chadha for Res.5 O R D E R PER HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN, CHAIRPERSON I. INTRODUCTION:

The Petitioner has filed this Execution Petition seeking directions to the 2^nd Respondent-GESCOM to comply with the final order passed by this Tribunal, in Appeal No. 160 of 2020 dated 02.08.2021, in its letter and spirit, by paying carrying cost on compounding basis on the delayed payment of differential tariff of Rs. 4.40 per unit which, they claim, was withheld by GESCOM for no fault of the part of the Petitioner, thereby compensating them for the time value of money. Among the directions issued by this Tribunal, in Appeal No. 160 of 2020 dated 02.08.2021, (execution of which is sought in the present proceedings), was for the 2^nd Respondent to pay the Appellant carrying cost/late payment surcharge on the differential amount of tariff in terms of Article 6.4 of the PPA.

Ms. Bhabna Das, Learned Counsel for the 2^nd Respondent, would submit that a total sum of Rs. 15,18,88,719/- has been paid by the 2^nd Respondent to the Petitioner; hence, the directions, in the Judgment of this Tribunal in Appeal No. 160 of 2020 dated 02.08.2021 (the “Decree’), stand fully complied; the 2^nd Respondent had preferred Civil Appeal No. 5134 of 2021 against the decree, which was dismissed on 09.12.2022; it has, thereafter, been paying a tariff of Rs. 8.40/ unit from December, 2022; ddifferential tariff totalling to Rs. 11,51,78,122/-, from May, 2017 to November, 2022, has been paid on` 31.12.2022; after reconciliation of accounts, Rs. 3,51,50,597/- was paid towards LPS from June, 2017 to November, 2022 on 31.03.2023; liquidated damages of Rs. 12,00,000/- was refunded on 31.12.2022; and damages of Rs. 3,60,000/- was paid on

02.01.2024.

II. RIVAL CONTENTIONS:

Elaborate submissions, both oral and written, were put forth by Sri B.P.

Patil, Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Ms. Bhabna Das, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the 2^nd Respondent.

It is convenient to examine the rival submissions under different heads.

III. DUTY OF THE EXECUTING COURT:

Sri B.P. Patil, Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, would submit that it is the duty of the executing court to find out the true effect of the decree, and to find out the meaning of the words employed in a decree; the true purpose of execution proceedings