Legal Provisions Involved: Section 125 of the Electricity Act, 2003; Articles 136 and 142 of the Constitution of India.

Judgement by: Supreme Court of India

Judge/Bench: Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Joymalya Bagchi

Facts

RattanIndia Power Limited (RPL) supplied electricity to MSEDCL under long-term agreements. Due to changes in law, RPL claimed compensation along with carrying cost and interest. While compensation was granted, there was disagreement over the rate and method of interest calculation. RPL challenged this before the Supreme Court. MSEDCL, however, did not file any appeal against the earlier tribunal order.

Key Legal Provisions

Section 125 of the Electricity Act, 2003

Articles 136 and 142 of the Constitution of India.

Issues Raised

Whether a party can object to an order when it has not filed its own appeal or cross-appeal?

Arguments of the Case

RPL argued it deserved interest on a compounding basis. MSEDCL tried to oppose this, even though it had not challenged the order earlier.

Judgement

The Supreme Court held that if a person does not file an appeal, it means they accept the order. Such a person cannot later raise objections in someone else’s appeal. The Court allowed RPL’s appeal and sent the matter back to the tribunal to decide the issue of compound interest again.

Click here to VIEW the full judgement.