PGVCL THROUGH DTY ENGINEER vs BHANJIBHAI VALJIBHAI KANTARIYA — 111/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 9. Disposed: Uncontested--EX on 16th March 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJJM110017482025
Filing Number
111/2025
Filing Date
08-09-2025
Registration No
111/2025
Registration Date
08-09-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, KALAVAD
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
16th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--EX
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
PGVCL THROUGH DTY ENGINEER
Adv. P D JADEJA
Respondent(s)
BHANJIBHAI VALJIBHAI KANTARIYA
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
FINAL ARGUMENTS
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
WRITTEN STATEMENT/REPLY
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 10-02-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 19-01-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
| 15-12-2025 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
| 17-11-2025 | WRITTEN STATEMENT/REPLY |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: RDM 111/2025 Court: Principal Civil Court, Kalavad Decided: March 16, 2026 Decision: The court partially allowed PGVCL's claim against respondent Bhanjibhai Valjibhai Kantariya for illegal electricity consumption. The court ordered the respondent to pay ₹16,095-31 (electricity theft bill amount) plus 6% annual interest from the date of filing until payment, rejecting the petitioner's claim for 16% interest due to lack of contractual evidence. The court found the respondent guilty of unlawful power theft based on inspection reports, photographs, and gate passes, awarding ex-parte judgment as the respondent failed to respond to summons or file any defense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: RDM 111/2025 Court: Principal Civil Court, Kalavad Decided: March 16, 2026 Decision: The court partially allowed PGVCL's claim against respondent Bhanjibhai Valjibhai Kantariya for illegal electricity consumption. The court ordered the respondent to pay ₹16,095-31 (electricity theft bill amount) plus 6% annual interest from the date of filing until payment, rejecting the petitioner's claim for 16% interest due to lack of contractual evidence. The court found the respondent guilty of unlawful power theft based on inspection reports, photographs, and gate passes, awarding ex-parte judgment as the respondent failed to respond to summons or file any defense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts