PGVCL THROUGH DTY ENGINEER vs JADAV KESHUBHAI MAKVANA — 112/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 9. Disposed: Uncontested--EX on 04th May 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJJM110017492025
Filing Number
112/2025
Filing Date
08-09-2025
Registration No
112/2025
Registration Date
08-09-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, KALAVAD
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
04th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--EX
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
PGVCL THROUGH DTY ENGINEER
Adv. P D JADEJA
Respondent(s)
JADAV KESHUBHAI MAKVANA
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
WRITTEN STATEMENT/REPLY
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 04-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 27-04-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 16-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 10-02-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
| 20-01-2026 | WRITTEN STATEMENT/REPLY |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: PGVCL v. Jadav Keshubhai Makwana (R.C.S. No. 112/2025) The Principal Civil Judge at Kalavad partly allowed PGVCL's suit against the defendant for electricity theft recovery. The court found the defendant guilty of illegally obtaining electricity by making a direct neutral connection from an electric pole, and ordered him to pay Rs. 14,204-43 with 6% per annum interest from the suit date. The court reduced the claimed 16% interest to 6% due to insufficient documentary evidence of the higher agreed rate, while rejecting the defendant's default appearance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: PGVCL v. Jadav Keshubhai Makwana (R.C.S. No. 112/2025) The Principal Civil Judge at Kalavad partly allowed PGVCL's suit against the defendant for electricity theft recovery. The court found the defendant guilty of illegally obtaining electricity by making a direct neutral connection from an electric pole, and ordered him to pay Rs. 14,204-43 with 6% per annum interest from the suit date. The court reduced the claimed 16% interest to 6% due to insufficient documentary evidence of the higher agreed rate, while rejecting the defendant's default appearance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts