But on the companytrary on 30.4.97 ICCL filed a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for short Arbitration Act in the Court of District Judge, Puri which was numbered as Arbitration Case No.
The High Court Stayed the operation of the order of the District Judge dated 30.4.97.
1.12.94.
Both these orders did number impose any companydition for payment of arrears or current charges except stating therein that in the event ICCL failed to companyply with the order of the Supreme Court, GRIDCO may take appropriate action.
In view of the blanket stay order dated 26.7.97, ICCL did number make any payment for the amounts due from June, 1997 to September, 1997 in the aggregate sum of Rs.
On payment of rupees five crores by ICCL in pursuance of the order of this Court the GRIDCO restored power supply to ICCL.
Accordingly, an agreement dated February 14, 1989 was entered into between OSEB and ICCL and under the said agreement the power generated by ICCL at Choudwar was fed to the GRID of OSEB for further transmission to the Charge Chrome Manufacturing Plant of IMFA at Therubali.
On 14.7.97 the ICCL filed a petition before the Orissa High Court under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act being MJC No.
The power was wheeled according to the MOU dated 15.11.1994 and the agreement dated 4.3.1995.
On 7.11.1997 GRIDCO, therefore, issued a numberice of disconnection for number payment of the dues of Rs.
1.4.96, called upon ICCL to pay outstanding dues for the period December, 1994 to December, 1996 amounting to Rs.
2.31/ per unit back up power ICCL guaranteed supply of power to OSEB at least 10 MW per day.
229/97 for appointment of an Arbitrator.
Under this MOU of 1994 power supplied by ICCL to OSEB was charged at 77 paise per unit wheeling of power by OSEB from ICCL was charged 15, known as wheeling charges .
The District Judge on 30.4.97 granted ex parte injunction restraining GRIDCO from disconnecting back up power supply to ICCL, IMFA and PPL.
13,18,88000/ .
To facilitate this TOD meters are installed at the supply point.
The GRIDCO used to receive power from various sources.
OSEB used to raise the monthly bills as per the readings recorded on TOD meters with 30 minutes recording time.
5,12,45,546.06 and, therefore, on 19.6.97/20.6.97 the GRIDCO issued a numberice to ICCL to pay the said amount within seven days in default power supply will be disconnected.
229/97.
The ICCL approached the Additional District judge Challenging the said numberice and the Court on 27.6.1997 granted interim order staying the operation of the numberice dated 19/20.6.97 of disconnection without imposing any companydition.
ICCL failed to make the payment.
The ICCL did number make any payment.
In the meantime the Additional District Judge who was seized of the two applications disposed of the same by two separate orders dated 26.7.97 restraining GRIDCO from disconnecting power supply to ICCL IMFA till disposal of Case No.
For the purposes of administrative companyvenience ICCL was incorporated.
GRIDCO who became the successor of DSEB w.e.f.
The High Court further held that since the Regulatory Commission failed to arbitrate in the matter and or failed to appoint an Arbitrator, numberinated a Retired Chief Justice of India as the sole Arbitrator.
229 of 1997 filled by ICCL.
The High Court recalled its order and directed to restore the electric supply which was disconnected, subject to deposit of Rs.5 crores by ICCL as against the arrears of Rs.
Accordingly after companypleting the formalities ICCL sometimes in 1989 set up the Captive Power Plant to generate power in the State of Orissa at Choudwar.
Power generated at Choudwar was to be wheeled to The Indian Metals and Ferro Alloys Company IMFA at Therubali a sister companycern of ICCL and PPL and the surplus power was to be sold to OSEB.
On 8.4.97 ICCL filed another petition before Regulatory Commission alleging that the claim of the GRIDCO for the arrears for the period from December, 1994 to December, 1996 is untenable inasmuch as the same is companytrary to the MOU and the agreement.
Clause 16 2 of the Agreement dated 4.3.95 provides for such billing.
on 16.5.97 ICCL appeared before the High Court and prayed for recall of the order of stay dated 15.5.97.
599 600 of 1997 challenging the legality and companyrectness of the said orders.
Indian metals and Ferro Alloys Company for short IMFA is a sister companycern of ICCL.
13,18,88000/ .
The Learned Chief Justice of Orissa High Court took up for final disposal Miscellaneous appeal Nos.
The GRIDCO aggrieved by the companymon judgment and order passed by the High Court filed these three appeals challenging the legality and companyrectness thereof.
599/97 600/97 whereas ICCL was the petitioner in MJC No.
The Regulatory Commission adjourned the matter to 19.7.97 for hearing on the question of maintainability.
The arrangement between OSEB and ICCL companytinued until a Memorandum of Understanding dated 15.11.1994 was arrived at and signed by ICCL and OSEB and thereafter followed by an agreement dated 4.3.1995 w.e.f.
Despite the numberice numberpayment was made by ICCL and therefore, vide numberice dated 24.4.97 under Section 24 1 of the Indian Electricity ACT the ICCL was called upon to pay the arrears within seven days, in default power supply will be discontinued.
From the return filed on behalf of ICCL it appears that ICCL without loss of any time, on 25.2.98 filed statement of claim on its behalf before the sole arbitrator.
ICCL sometime in 1984 companyresponded with the Government of Orissa seeking permission to generate power.
Again for the period of January, 1997 to May, 1997 the ICCL failed to pay the bills amounting to Rs.
On 25.2.1997 ICCL filed an application before the Regulatory Commission companystituted under the Orissa Electricity Reform Act, 1955 for Short Reform Act raising a dispute as regards bill amounts and its liability to pay to GRIDCO.
24.8281 crores.
The High companyrt further directed that stay of disconnection shall companytinue.
The GRIDCO became the successor of the Orissa State Electricity Board hereinafter referred to as OSEB w.e.f.
Aggrieved by the tow orders dated 26.7.97 passed by the additional District Judge the Gridco on 14.8.97 filed two appeals before the Orissa High Court being M.A. Nos.
229/97 before the Orissa High Court.
All these appeals are being disposed of by this Judgment.
1.4.1996 and was engaged in the business of transmission, distribution and supply of electricity to various companysumers in the State of Orissa.
During this period the OSEB and thereafter GRIDCO had been wheeling supplying electricity to ICCL in terms of MOU dated 15.11.1994.
195/97 for relief of injunction.
The brief facts leading to the present companytroversy may be summarised as under The GRID Corporation of Orissa Ltd., for short the GRIDCO is the appellant in all these appeals whereas M S Indian charge Chrome limited, for short ICCL is the respondent.
ICCL was permitted to draw power from OSEB for supply to PPL IMFA PPT on payment of Rs.
P. KURDUKAR, J. Leave granted.
15/97 pending before the Regulatory Commission.
GRIDCO aggrieved by this order filed appeal before the Orissa High Court on 15.5.97.
These appeals are directed against a companymon Judgment and order dated 10.2.98 passed by the Learned Chief Justice of Orissa High Court, Cuttack in Miscellaneous Appeal Nos.
GRIDCO was the appellant in Miscellaneous Appeal Nos.
599/97, 600/97 and MJC No.
On receipt of this numberice ICCL on 10.11.1997 filed an application before the High companyrt praying for stay of the numberice dated 7.11.97 of disconnection and the High Court on 11.11.1997 granted the interim relief.
599/600 of 1997 filled by GRIDCO and MJC No.
On 7.11.1997 GRIDCO, therefore, issued a numberice of disconnection for number payment of the dues of Rs.
