SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Online)(SC) 1513

SUPREME COURT
DY Chandrachud, CJ, Vikram Nath, J
Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited – Appellant
Versus
Karnataka Renewable Energy Development Limited – Respondent
Civil Appeal 9273 of 2019|Civil Appeal 9274 of 2019



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Tushar Mehta, Balaji Srinivasan
For the Respondents: Basava Prabhu Patil

The court upheld the Appellate Tribunal's interpretation of commissioning dates, emphasizing contract terms over punitive tariffs for alleged delays.

Headnote:(A) Electricity Act, 2003 - Section 86 - Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission’s authority to determine tariff - Appellant's imposed reduction of tariff was deemed contrary to the agreements - Scheduled Commissioning Date in dispute - Commissioning certification established operation before the end of contractual deadlines. (Paras 20, 21)

(B) Interpretation of contracts - The interpretative principles of the contract guided the conclusion regarding Scheduled Commissioning Date; the background and language of the contract carry significance in determining obligations and penalties related to delays. (Paras 15, 19)

Facts of the case:
The Appeals concern the determination of tariff reduction imposed by the Appellants against the Respondents for alleged delay in commissioning solar projects. Commissioning dates were disputed, affecting tariffs payable.

Findings of Court:
The Appellate Tribunal confirmed the earlier determination of the commissioning dates and ruled that operational commencement justified their claims, leading to the dismissal of the appeals.

Issues: The key issues included the determination of the Scheduled Commissioning Date and whether actual power injection into the grid was critical for operational classification.

Ratio Decidendi: The interpretation favored excluding the date of PPA approval for counting contractual months, confirming that operational certificates suffice to demonstrate commissioning.

Result: Appeals dismissed.

Table of Content
1. appeals arise from commission tariff disputes. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments consider commissioning and tariff regulations. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
3. interpretation of contract timelines is critical. (Para 15 , 18 , 19)
4. scheduled date calculations focus on contractual terms. (Para 20)
5. the court upheld the appellate tribunal's decisions. (Para 22)

1. These appeals arise out of a judgment of the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity at Delhi by which the order passed by the Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission (KERC) was reversed.

2. The facts that are necessary for adjudication of the dispute in these appeals are as follows:
(a) Karnataka Renewable Energy Development Limited (KREDL) issued a Request for proposal on 20.11.2015 from bidders for undertaking development of Solar PV ground mount Power Plants in Karnataka pursuant to a decision taken by the State Government for development of 1200 MWA of Solar power to be implemented in 60 Taluks through private sector participation. Emmvee Photovoltaic Power Private Limited, the second Respondent herein, incorporated two Special Purpose Vehicles (SPV) in accordance with the terms of the Request for Proposal and submitted its bid for acceptance by the first Appellant, Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited.
(b) Respondent No. 1 in Civil Appeal 9273 of 2019 is a special purpose vehicle constituted by Respondent No. 2 for setting up a Solar PV ground mount Project with a capacity of 10 MWA (AC) in Bidar Rural Taluk, Bidar District, Respondent No. 1 in Civil Appeal 9274 of 2019 is a special purpose vehicle for setting up a 20 MWA (AC) capacity Solar PV ground mount Project in Bagepalli Taluk, Chikkaballapura.
(c) The Projects were awarded to the Respondents on 31.03.2016. Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) were entered into between the parties on 23.05.2016. The Power Purchase Agreements were approved by Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission (KERC) on 17.10.2016. Supplementary Power Purchase Agreements were entered into between the parties on 17.12.2016 incorporating the modifications suggested by the Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission on 07.12.2016.
(d) In respect of the Bidar Project, a Commissioning Certificate was issued on 25.10.2017 by KPTCL on the basis of minutes of meeting that was held on 16.10.2017. The Commissioning Certificate for Bagpalli Project was also issued on 23.11.2017.




3. Original Petition (OP) No. 18 of 2018 was filed by the Respondents in Civil Appeal 9274 of 2019 aggrieved by the reduction of the tariff payable by Appellant No. 1 from Rs. 6.10 / kWh to Rs. 4.36 / kWh and imposition of damages of Rs. 20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs only) for delay in commissioning the plant.

4. Apart from others, the main ground taken in the Original Petition by the Respondents is that Commissioning of the Project took place on 16.10.2017 which is clear from the Minutes of meeting drawn by the Officials of KPTCL. The meeting was attended by officers of KPTCL, officers of GSCOM and representatives of the Respondents. It was contended by the Respondents that the Project commenced its operations within 12 months from the date of approval of the PPA by the Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission and the imposition of damages and reduction of tariff payable by the Appellant was contrary to the provisions of the agreement.

5. Original Petition No. 19 of 2018 was filed by the Respondents in Civil Appeal 9273 of 2019 in respect of the Solar PV ground mount Power Project in Bidar for reliefs similar to those claimed in OP 18 of 2018.

6. The Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission by its Order dated 23.10.2018 dismissed OP No. 18 of 2018 and OP No. 19 of 2018. The Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission framed four issues for consideration which are as follows:
(i) 'Whether the Scheduled Commissioning date' of the Solar Power Projects in question would fall in 16.10.2017 or 17.10.2017.
(ii) On what date the Solar Power Projects in OP No. 18 of 2018







































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top