PGVCL vs JUMA SIDIBHAI CHOTIYARA — 83/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 96. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 07th April 2026.
RCA - REGULAR CIVIL APPEAL
CNR: GJGS010006912025
Filing Number
83/2025
Filing Date
17-Jun-2025
Registration No
83/2025
Registration Date
17-Jun-2025
Court
District Court, Veraval
Judge
1-Principal District Judge
Decision Date
07-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGEMENT
Last updated 23-Apr-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.PGVCL
Adv. K P RATHOD
Respondent(s)
-
1.JUMA SIDIBHAI CHOTIYARA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
07-Apr-2026
JudegementView PDF
Summary The Principal District Judge, Gir-Somnath allowed Paschim Gujarat Vij Company's appeal and quashed the trial court's dismissal of its suit seeking recovery of Rs. 6,998.40 for unauthorized electricity consumption. The court held that civil courts have jurisdiction to entertain such debt recovery cases involving electricity theft allegations, as Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (unauthorized use assessment) is distinct from Section 135 (criminal theft), and remanded the matter for trial on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
07-Apr-2026
Disposed
Principal District Judge
-
25-Mar-2026
Final Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
09-Mar-2026
Final Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
04-Feb-2026
Final Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
03-Jan-2026
Final Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
02-Dec-2025
Final Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
29-Oct-2025
Final Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
16-Sep-2025
Final Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
21-Aug-2025
Final Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
23-Jul-2025
For R&P
Principal District Judge
-
17-Jun-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
17-Jun-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 83/2025
Summary The Principal District Judge, Gir-Somnath allowed Paschim Gujarat Vij Company's appeal and quashed the trial court's dismissal of its suit seeking recovery of Rs. 6,998.40 for unauthorized electricity consumption. The court held that civil courts have jurisdiction to entertain such debt recovery cases involving electricity theft allegations, as Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (unauthorized use assessment) is distinct from Section 135 (criminal theft), and remanded the matter for trial on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts