PGVCL vs CHANABHAI DEVABHAI HUN Advocate - EX — 27/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1. Disposed: Uncontested--JUDGEMENT on 18th April 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJDW060005142024
Filing Number
27/2024
Filing Date
16-04-2024
Registration No
27/2024
Registration Date
16-04-2024
Court
TALUKA COURT, BHANVAD
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
18th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--JUDGEMENT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
PGVCL
Adv. M T NANAVATI
Respondent(s)
CHANABHAI DEVABHAI HUN Advocate - EX
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 13-04-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 14-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 27-02-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 06-02-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case 27/2024 Summary PGVCL v. Chanabhai Devabhai Hun The court partially granted PGVCL's case against the respondent for electricity theft. The respondent illegally connected a power line to his residence without authorization, installed an unauthorized twin-core wire, and consumed electricity without a valid connection. The court found the respondent liable and ordered him to pay Rs. 38,470.23 (the disputed bill amount) plus 6% annual interest from the date of the bill, along with court costs. The court rejected the respondent's plea for additional interest beyond the contractual rate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case 27/2024 Summary PGVCL v. Chanabhai Devabhai Hun The court partially granted PGVCL's case against the respondent for electricity theft. The respondent illegally connected a power line to his residence without authorization, installed an unauthorized twin-core wire, and consumed electricity without a valid connection. The court found the respondent liable and ordered him to pay Rs. 38,470.23 (the disputed bill amount) plus 6% annual interest from the date of the bill, along with court costs. The court rejected the respondent's plea for additional interest beyond the contractual 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