Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal Case Shots is built to help you quickly identify and understand relevant precedent. For citation in pleadings or filings, always verify against the full judgment PDF and current citation format (e.g., 2026 INSC ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

The holding is what the court legally decided. The lesson learnt translates that into a practical takeaway: what a lawyer should factor into case strategy or client advice as a result of this precedent.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

Both. Each case shows a distilled summary (case type, key holding, and lesson learnt) and links to the full judgment as a PDF for when you need the complete text for research or citation.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

Yes. Use Advanced Filters to narrow results by decision date and by practice area, including Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Service & Administrative Law, Family Law, Civil Property & Inheritance, and Labour & Industrial Law.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

Yes. You can filter judgments by the judge or bench that decided the case, which is useful for tracking how a particular judge has reasoned on similar issues across multiple rulings.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

Legal Case Shots is a searchable database of Supreme Court of India judgments, each broken down into the case type, the court's key holding, and a practical lesson learnt, with the full judgment available as a PDF for citation or deeper reading.

Electricity & Energy LawSupreme Court of India

Solar Energy Corporation of India Limited vs. Wind Four Renergy Private Limited

Not available · 2024 INSC 160Decided 27 Feb 2024
Not available
Justice Sanjiv Khanna · Justice Dipankar Datta

Background

SECI, the nodal central agency for renewable energy, and Wind Four Renergy Private Limited (WFRPL) had signed five Power Purchase Agreements in 2017 for wind power units, with a commissioning deadline plus extensions available for delay. WFRPL failed to commission the fifth 50 MW unit on time and sought condonation of delay; the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) allowed 132 days of delay to be condoned, computed from a fixed date. The Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) instead ruled that the 132-day condoned period should run from the date of its own judgment (11.01.2022), effectively giving WFRPL far more time. SECI challenged this before the Supreme Court.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court held that APTEL's direction was irrational and contrary to the scheme of the PPA, since WFRPL had already been given the benefit of extensions and knew the project's actual status well before APTEL's judgment. The Court set aside APTEL's order and restored CERC's original order fixing the commissioning timeline. It also directed that Rs. 10 crore SECI had refunded to WFRPL (after its bank guarantee was encashed) must be repaid by WFRPL with 12% interest, failing which it would be recovered as electricity dues under the Electricity Act.

Lesson Learnt

Contractual timelines and regulatory extensions in infrastructure/energy projects are computed on the facts as they stood at the relevant date, not reset to a later date convenient to the defaulting party. Courts will correct an appellate tribunal's order if it effectively rewards continued delay.

Solar Energy Corporation of India Limited vs. Wind Four Renergy Private Limited – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware