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

Case disposed

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

Electricity Act, 2003 Section 54

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

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. 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.

casestatus.in Summary

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

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, GARIADHAR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case