JSA Advocates and Solicitors (JSA) successfully represented Adani Power Ltd. (“Adani”) in a Civil Appeal filed by Karnataka Discoms. Supreme Court by Order dated 17.08.2026 dismissed the Civil Appeal on the first listing and refused to interfere with the Order passed by the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (“APTEL”) dated 10.04.2026. APTEL had refused to grant interim relief to Karnataka Discoms qua their plea seeking stay of Adani’s invoice dated 12.01.2026 to the tune of ~1000 Cr. raised towards Carrying Cost and Late Payment Surcharge (“LPS”) on the outstanding Carrying Cost. Accordingly, the dismissal of the Civil Appeal, for the time being secures Adani, the payment of ~1000 Cr.
Brief facts:
By an Order dated 13.01.2023 passed by Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (“CERC”), Karnataka Discoms were directed to pay Adani certain fixed charges, energy charges and Carrying Cost. A dispute arose on account of wilful disobedience by Karnataka Discoms and their non-compliance in denying payment of Carrying Cost, whereby, Karnataka Discoms unilaterally withheld substantial amounts towards Carrying Cost and LPS. Ergo, Adani, through JSA, filed an Execution Petition before CERC. By Order dated 07.01.2026, CERC allowed Adani’s Execution Petition, and directed Karnataka Discoms to pay the withheld Carrying Cost, alongwith LPS. Accordingly, Adani raised an invoice dated 12.01.2026 to implement CERC’s Order dated 07.01.2026 passed in the Execution Petition.
Though on 20.02.2026, Karnataka Discoms filed an Appeal in APTEL, they also filed a Writ Petition on 27.02.2026 before High Court of Karnataka. This amounted to forum shopping as the relief claimed was same before both the fora. The High Court of Karnataka denied interim relief to Karnataka Discoms. Karnataka Discoms chose not to challenge the said Order before Division Bench. Later, APTEL also denied the interim order on 10.04.2026.
Findings:
The APTEL Order dated 10.04.2026 was assailed by Karnataka Discoms before the Supreme Court, pursuant to which, the Supreme Court dismissed the Civil Appeal in limine. During the hearing, the Supreme Court criticized Karnataka Discoms’ conduct of forum hunting and also remarked that Appeals against interlocutory orders would NOT be maintainable under Section 125 of the Electricity Act, 2003. This kind of in limine dismissal is unique since the courts normally issue notice on the first date especially when a government company is an Appellant.
Our Disputes team comprised Poonam Verma Sengupta, Lead Partner; Saunak Rajguru, Principal Associate and Subham Bhut, Associate.
Poonam has been actively involved in the disputes and corporate practice of the firm with primary focus in the Energy and Transportation Sector. For around two decades with the firm, Poonam has specialized in Power and Aviation Sectors.