PGVCL Gariyadhar Through Its Deputy Engineer vs DHIRUBHAI KESHAVBHAI BORICHA — 247/2025
Case under Electricity Act, 2003 Section 54. Disposed: Uncontested--EX-PARTE JUDGEMENT on 23rd April 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJBN060010342025
Filing Number
247/2025
Filing Date
07-10-2025
Registration No
247/2025
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
Petitioner(s)
PGVCL Gariyadhar Through Its Deputy Engineer
Adv. I L PARMAR
Respondent(s)
DHIRUBHAI KESHAVBHAI BORICHA
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 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
Case Summary: RCS No. 247 of 2025 The court partially allowed PGVCL's claim against defendant Dhirubhai Keshavbhai Boricha for recovery of outstanding electricity dues. The court found that the defendant had not paid an electricity bill of Rs. 12,923.91 with a late payment charge of Rs. 2,763.60 (total Rs. 12,923.91). The court ordered the defendant to pay this amount along with 6% annual interest from the claim date until payment, and permitted recovery from the defendant's movable and immovable property if the amount remains unpaid. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: RCS No. 247 of 2025 The court partially allowed PGVCL's claim against defendant Dhirubhai Keshavbhai Boricha for recovery of outstanding electricity dues. The court found that the defendant had not paid an electricity bill of Rs. 12,923.91 with a late payment charge of Rs. 2,763.60 (total Rs. 12,923.91). The court ordered the defendant to pay this amount along with 6% annual interest from the claim date until payment, and permitted recovery from the defendant's movable and immovable property if the amount remains unpaid. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts