JAGDISHBHAI BHULCHANDBHAI RAJAI PARTNER OF SATGURU COLOR WORLD vs DEPUTY COLLECTOR SHREE Advocate - AGP — 1/2023
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 Section 29(3). Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED on 13th March 2026.
CRA - CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION
CNR: GJBN010044592023
Filing Number
1/2023
Filing Date
12-Oct-2023
Registration No
1/2023
Registration Date
12-Oct-2023
Court
DISTICT AND SESSIONS COURT, BHAVNAGAR
Judge
1-Principal District Judge
Decision Date
13-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--DISMISSED
Last updated 31-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.JAGDISHBHAI BHULCHANDBHAI RAJAI PARTNER OF SATGURU COLOR WORLD
Adv. H N SHAH
Respondent(s)
-
1.DEPUTY COLLECTOR SHREE Advocate - AGP
-
2.JAMANDAS ASANDAS RAJI TRUSTEE OF SHREE GURU KRUPA SEVA MANDAL
Adv. G G PARIKH
-
3.ATURSINGH CHETANDAS HEIR OF DECD.CHETANDAS LALCHAND
Adv. ABATED
-
4.SHREE M. V. CHUDASAMA DEPUTY ENGINEER PASCHIM GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD. - HILL DRIVE DIVISION
Adv. A D JOSHI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
13-Mar-2026
JudegementView PDF
Case Summary: CRA 1/2023 The Principal District Judge, Bhavnagar dismissed the tenant's (Satguru Colour World's) civil revision application challenging a Deputy Collector's order regarding electricity supply to the rented premises. The court held that Section 23A of the Bombay Rent Hotel & Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947—which permits tenants to obtain independent electricity connections when landlords refuse consent—did not apply, as the landlord had not withheld consent but rather had voluntarily discontinued the existing connection. Since the tenant's circumstances fell outside Section 23A's scope, the application was dismissed without considering merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
13-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal District Judge
-
02-Mar-2026
Interim Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
13-Feb-2026
Interim Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
09-Feb-2026
Interim Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
13-Jan-2026
Service Of Process
4th Addl District Judge
-
29-Dec-2025
Service Of Process
4th Addl District Judge
-
13-Dec-2025
Service Of Process
4th Addl District Judge
-
12-Dec-2025
Service Of Process
4th Addl District Judge
-
04-Dec-2025
Service Of Process
4th Addl District Judge
-
08-Oct-2025
Service Of Process
4th Addl District Judge
-
10-Sep-2025
Service Of Process
4th Addl District Judge
-
01-Sep-2025
Service Of Process
4th Addl District Judge
-
07-Jul-2025
Service Of Process
4th Addl District Judge
-
02-Jul-2025
Service Of Process
4th Addl District Judge
-
18-Jun-2025
Service Of Process
4th Addl District Judge
-
02-May-2025
Service Of Process
3rd Addl District Judge
-
21-Mar-2025
Service Of Process
3rd Addl District Judge
-
03-Jan-2025
Service Of Process
3rd Addl District Judge
-
21-Nov-2024
Service Of Process
3rd Addl District Judge
-
17-Oct-2024
Service Of Process
3rd Addl District Judge
-
12-Sep-2024
Service Of Process
3rd Addl District Judge
-
26-Jul-2024
Service Of Process
3rd Addl District Judge
-
19-Jul-2024
Service Of Process
3rd Addl District Judge
-
14-Jun-2024
Service Of Process
3rd Addl District Judge
-
09-May-2024
Service Of Process
3rd Addl District Judge
-
24-Apr-2024
Service Of Process
3rd Addl District Judge
-
19-Feb-2024
Service Of Process
3rd Addl District Judge
-
22-Dec-2023
Service Of Process
3rd Addl District Judge
-
25-Nov-2023
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
12-Oct-2023
Case filed
Registration No. 1/2023
Case Summary: CRA 1/2023 The Principal District Judge, Bhavnagar dismissed the tenant's (Satguru Colour World's) civil revision application challenging a Deputy Collector's order regarding electricity supply to the rented premises. The court held that Section 23A of the Bombay Rent Hotel & Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947—which permits tenants to obtain independent electricity connections when landlords refuse consent—did not apply, as the landlord had not withheld consent but rather had voluntarily discontinued the existing connection. Since the tenant's circumstances fell outside Section 23A's scope, the application was dismissed without considering merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts