https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174554 A tripartite electricity-supply agreement fixing provisional charges with retrospective adjustment was treated as a binding contract because it aligned with the statutory scheme for determining reasonable return and did not offend the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 or section 23 of the Contract Act. The claim for differential charges was held to fall under the residuary limitation provision, as the right to sue arose only when the Rating Committee's report was approved, so the suit was within time. Regular accounts and secondary evidence substantially proved the claim, subject to exclusion of two unsupported items. Interest was denied because electricity is not goods for the Sale of Goods Act, 1930. en-us Fri, 27 Oct 1972 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Oct 2015 11:01:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174554 A tripartite electricity-supply agreement fixing provisional charges with retrospective adjustment was treated as a binding contract because it aligned with the statutory scheme for determining reasonable return and did not offend the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 or section 23 of the Contract Act. The claim for differential charges was held to fall under the residuary limitation provision, as the right to sue arose only when the Rating Committee's report was approved, so the suit was within time. Regular accounts and secondary evidence substantially proved the claim, subject to exclusion of two unsupported items. Interest was denied because electricity is not goods for the Sale of Goods Act, 1930. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 27 Oct 1972 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174554