DAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION versus CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION & OTHERS

DAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION versus CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION & OTHERS

Appellant was already accorded tariff computation benefits consistent with Section 38 of DVC Act, by providing return on equity and interest on loan as per debt-equity ratio; any further claim for additional interest on entire capital is impermissible. The challenge regarding cumulative depreciation as repayment of loan could not be raised as it had attained finality in earlier unchallenged orders.

Parties
Appellant: Damodar Valley Corporation; Respondents: Central Electricity Regulatory Commission & Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
03 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Order of Appellate Tribunal for Electricity
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Tariff Computation, Interest on Capital, Depreciation and Loan Repayment, Damodar Valley Corporation Act, Electricity Act 2003

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Damodar Valley Corporation

Appellant

Central Electricity Regulatory Commission & Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Order of Appellate Tribunal for Electricity

  1. 1 Whether Section 38 of the Damodar Valley Corporation Act entitles appellant to benefit of interest on capital in tariff computation over and above return on equity and interest on loan
  2. 2 Whether cumulative depreciation should be treated as repayment of loan to reduce notional loan component in capital cost

Ratio Decidendi

Appellant was already accorded tariff computation benefits consistent with Section 38 of DVC Act, by providing return on equity and interest on loan as per debt-equity ratio; any further claim for additional interest on entire capital is impermissible. The challenge regarding cumulative depreciation as repayment of loan could not be raised as it had attained finality in earlier unchallenged orders.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No interference; parties to bear their respective costs