PGVCL Gariyadhar Through Its Deputy Engineer vs MOHISANBHAI NAJIRBHAI CHAUHAN — 40/2026

Case under Electricity Act, 2003 Section 54. Disposed: Uncontested--EX-PARTE JUDGEMENT on 07th May 2026.

Case disposed

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJBN060000782026

Filing Number

40/2026

Filing Date

29-Jan-2026

Registration No

40/2026

Registration Date

29-Jan-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, GARIADHAR

Judge

1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

07-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--EX-PARTE JUDGEMENT

Last updated 31-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Electricity Act, 2003 Section 54

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PGVCL Gariyadhar Through Its Deputy Engineer

    Adv. I L PARMAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.MOHISANBHAI NAJIRBHAI CHAUHAN

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-May-2026

    Judegement

    Case Summary: RCS No. 40 OF 2026 PGVCL Gariyadhar v. Mohisanbhai Najirbhai Chauhan The court partially allowed PGVCL's claim for recovery of Rs. 38,572/68 for unauthorized electricity theft. The court found that the respondent had illegally drawn power directly from the company's line without authorization and ordered recovery of the bill amount plus 6% annual interest from the date of filing until payment. The respondent is also liable to pay costs, and recovery is enforceable against his personal and immovable property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-May-2026

    Disposed

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 02-May-2026

    Judgement

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 29-Apr-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  6. 13-Mar-2026

    Written Statement

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  7. 29-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 29-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 40/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: RCS No. 40 OF 2026 PGVCL Gariyadhar v. Mohisanbhai Najirbhai Chauhan The court partially allowed PGVCL's claim for recovery of Rs. 38,572/68 for unauthorized electricity theft. The court found that the respondent had illegally drawn power directly from the company's line without authorization and ordered recovery of the bill amount plus 6% annual interest from the date of filing until payment. The respondent is also liable to pay costs, and recovery is enforceable against his personal and immovable property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case