PGVCL Gariyadhar Through Its Deputy Engineer vs VINUBHAI LAKSHMANBHAI — 250/2025
Case under Electricity Act, 2003 Section 54. Disposed: Uncontested--EX-PARTE JUDGEMENT on 23rd April 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJBN060010372025
Filing Number
250/2025
Filing Date
07-10-2025
Registration No
250/2025
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)
VINUBHAI LAKSHMANBHAI
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. 250/2025 Court Decision: The court partially allowed PGVCL's claim against Vinubhai Lakshmanbhai for recovery of unpaid electricity charges totaling ₹75,150/40 paise with 6% annual interest from the bill date until payment. The respondent must also surrender the property to recover dues through attachment and sale if needed. Key Reasoning: The court found that PGVCL established its case through proper documentation and witness testimony, while the respondent failed to contest the claim or provide any defense. The electricity supply agreement and billing records proved the outstanding debt, justifying recovery proceedings with interest at the prescribed rate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: RCS No. 250/2025 Court Decision: The court partially allowed PGVCL's claim against Vinubhai Lakshmanbhai for recovery of unpaid electricity charges totaling ₹75,150/40 paise with 6% annual interest from the bill date until payment. The respondent must also surrender the property to recover dues through attachment and sale if needed. Key Reasoning: The court found that PGVCL established its case through proper documentation and witness testimony, while the respondent failed to contest the claim or provide any defense. The electricity supply agreement and billing records proved the outstanding debt, justifying recovery proceedings with interest at the prescribed rate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts