Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (5) TMI 389 - SUPREME COURTLowering of contract load - Held that:- SLP dismissed. In the totality of the existing circumstances, of which KESCO was fully aware, the decision not to accept the Bond was not in accordance with the decision arrived at on 19-4-2006 to reduce the contract load from 8 MVA to 1.25 MVA. In fact, the Respondent-Company had been declared to be a Relief Undertaking by the State Government on an application dated 24-6-2004. Furthermore, soon after the decision was arrived at to lower the contract load, the Respondent-Company was also declared as a Sick Company on 8-5-2007 and the BIFR, while considering the revival of the Respondent-Company by its order dated 22-4-2007, directed KESCO to continue to accept ₹ 5 lakhs per month against the arrears apart from payment of the current electricity bills on actual consumption basis and also not to adopt coercive measures to disconnect the supply of electricity of the Respondent-Company. As indicated hereinabove, the result of the continued insistence of KESCO that a Bank Guarantee should be provided by the Respondent No. 1-Company in respect of its outstanding dues, had the effect of negating the decisions to revive the Company.
|