- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Ind-Barath Energy (Utkal) Bags Arbitration Award Against Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corp
Ind-Barath Energy (Utkal) Bags Arbitration Award Against Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corp The matter pertained to the agreement for procurement of 500 MW power Ind-Barath Energy (Utkal) Ltd, the subsidiary company of JSW Energy Ltd, has announced that an arbitral tribunal has issued an award in its favor against Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
Ind-Barath Energy (Utkal) Bags Arbitration Award Against Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corp
The matter pertained to the agreement for procurement of 500 MW power
Ind-Barath Energy (Utkal) Ltd, the subsidiary company of JSW Energy Ltd, has announced that an arbitral tribunal has issued an award in its favor against Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd (Tangedco).
In 2013, Ind-Barath had initiated arbitration proceedings against Tangedco after disputes arose due to the power purchase agreement between the entities. The agreement was for the procurement of 500 MW by Tangedco.
Ind-Barath had sought the return of the contract performance bank guarantee of Rs.120 crores and a refund of Rs.11.02 crores deducted by Tangedco from its monthly invoices. It also alleged failure on the part of Tangedco to provide a standby letter of credit, unilateral deduction of tariff, and wrongful termination of the power purchase agreement, and sought damages.
The company, in a stock exchange filing, stated that the arbitral tribunal had allowed its claim for recovery of Rs.120 crores from Tangedco, along with 9 percent interest from the date of encashment of performance bank guarantee by the state power utility till the payment of the entire amount.
The power infrastructure development company added that the tribunal had also rejected Tangedco’s counterclaim for recovery of Rs.118 crores penalty and Rs.200 crores termination charges.