PGVCL Gariyadhar Through Its Deputy Engineer vs MEHURBHAI VALABHAI DHADHAL — 243/2025

Case under Electricity Act, 2003 Section 54. Disposed: Uncontested--EX-PARTE JUDGEMENT on 23rd April 2026.

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJBN060010302025

Case disposed

Filing Number

243/2025

Filing Date

07-10-2025

Registration No

243/2025

Registration Date

07-10-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, GARIADHAR

Judge

1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

23rd April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--EX-PARTE JUDGEMENT

Acts & Sections

Electricity Act, 2003 Section 54

Petitioner(s)

PGVCL Gariyadhar Through Its Deputy Engineer

Adv. I L PARMAR

Respondent(s)

MEHURBHAI VALABHAI DHADHAL

Hearing History

Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

23-04-2026

Disposed

13-03-2026

JUDGEMENT

30-01-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

19-12-2025

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

27-11-2025

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

Final Orders / Judgements

23-04-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Case Summary: RCS No. 243/2025 Court Decision: The court partially allowed PGVCL's claim against Mehurbhai Valabhai Dhadhal. The court ordered the defendant to pay Rs. 8,939.41 with 6% annual interest from the date of filing until payment, plus costs. The defendant's property and assets are liable for recovery of the unpaid electricity bill amount. Key Reasoning: The court found that the defendant had an electricity connection (No. 40050/00375/5) with the plaintiff utility company and failed to pay the outstanding dues despite receiving notices. The plaintiff substantiated its claim through documentary evidence and witness testimony, which the defendant failed to contest or challenge effectively. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: RCS No. 243/2025 Court Decision: The court partially allowed PGVCL's claim against Mehurbhai Valabhai Dhadhal. The court ordered the defendant to pay Rs. 8,939.41 with 6% annual interest from the date of filing until payment, plus costs. The defendant's property and assets are liable for recovery of the unpaid electricity bill amount. Key Reasoning: The court found that the defendant had an electricity connection (No. 40050/00375/5) with the plaintiff utility company and failed to pay the outstanding dues despite receiving notices. The plaintiff substantiated its claim through documentary evidence and witness testimony, which the defendant failed to contest or challenge effectively. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, GARIADHAR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case