Court Decision
2024-12-18
Subject: Energy Law - Electricity Regulation
In a significant ruling, the Hon’ble Justice
Ramesh Ranganathan
, Chairperson, addressed an appeal filed by
Appellant's Arguments:
Respondents' Arguments:
The respondents, representing the Rajasthan Discoms, argued that the imposition of evacuation facility charges was not a change in law event. They maintained that the appellant had not demonstrated actual financial impact due to the charges and that the claims were not substantiated by the necessary documentation.
The court analyzed the arguments presented by both parties, referencing previous judgments, including the Supreme Court's ruling in GMR Warora Energy Ltd. v. CERC. The court noted that the imposition of evacuation facility charges was indeed a change in law event, as it was a new charge that had not been in effect prior to the specified date. The court emphasized the importance of restitutionary principles, which aim to restore the affected party to its original economic position prior to the change in law.
The court ruled in favor of
This ruling underscores the legal recognition of changes in regulatory charges and their implications for power producers, reinforcing the principles of compensation and restitution in energy law.
#EnergyLaw #ElectricityRegulation #LegalJudgment
Family Judge Exposes Weaponized Litigation in Custody Dispute
14 Feb 2026
Centre Notifies Two High Court Chief Justice Appointments
16 Feb 2026
Deep Chandra Joshi Appointed Acting NCLT President
16 Feb 2026
Debunking the Myth That Indians Lack Privacy Concepts
16 Feb 2026
Whose View Is It Anyway? Juniors Uncredited
16 Feb 2026
Private Property Disputes Not Human Rights Violations; HRC Lacks Jurisdiction Under PHRA: Gujarat HC
16 Feb 2026
Supreme Court Rejects Stay on RTI Data Amendments
16 Feb 2026
DIFC Court: Strong Reasons Required to Block Arbitration
17 Feb 2026
Bar Leaders Oppose High Courts Saturday Sittings
17 Feb 2026
The Notification imposing Evacuation Facility Charges constitutes a change in law, entitling the affected party to compensation from that date.
Court should be slow in interfering with decision taken by expert bodies.
The term “Law” in the PPAs would include all applicable rules, regulations, orders, Notifications issued by an Indian Governmental Instrumentality and shall also include all rules, regulations, decis....
Expert bodies' decisions should not be interfered with unless they violate statutory provisions or are arbitrary.
Any change resulting in a cost impact on selling electricity constitutes a Change in Law event, entitling affected parties to compensation under PPAs.
Definition of “Law” is wide enough to include all rules, regulations, orders, notifications by Governmental instrumentalities.
The court emphasized the need to consider certain electricity-related issues afresh based on relevant legal precedents.
The court established that consumers cannot be charged for interest/carrying costs due to DISCOMS' delayed payments, limiting the special fuel surcharge to the original principal amount only.
A notification or order by an Indian Governmental Instrumentality can constitute a 'Change in Law' event under a Power Purchase Agreement if it impacts contractual obligations.
Carrying Cost is compensable for Change in Law events, and the affected party must be restored to its original economic position, supporting claims for compound interest.
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.