PARAMVIR ICE FACTORYS OWNER, VIRUBEN PARSOTAMBHAI KHERAVA vs PGVCL MANGROL Advocate - K T DUBEY — 49/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 96. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 27th March 2026.

Case disposed

RCA - REGULAR CIVIL APPEAL

CNR: GJJN210014172024

Filing Number

49/2024

Filing Date

20-Dec-2024

Registration No

49/2024

Registration Date

20-Dec-2024

Court

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT-KESHOD

Judge

1-2nd Addl District Judge

Decision Date

27-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGEMENT

Last updated 21-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 96

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PARAMVIR ICE FACTORYS OWNER, VIRUBEN PARSOTAMBHAI KHERAVA

    Adv. D V KUMBHANI

  2. 2.PARSOTAMBHAI KESHAVBHAI KHORAVA

    Adv. D V KUMBHANI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.PGVCL MANGROL Advocate - K T DUBEY

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 27-Mar-2026

    Judegement

    Summary The 2nd Additional District Judge, Junagadh allowed the appeal and set aside the trial court's judgment dismissing the plaintiff's suit. The court held that the electricity distribution company failed to prove electricity theft against the ice factory owner because: (1) no meter testing was conducted by an Electrical Inspector or independent expert; (2) the anomaly code found in the meter was not definitively proven to indicate theft rather than a technical fault; and (3) no provisional bill was issued as mandated by the Electricity Act. The company is barred from recovering the supplementary bill of ₹9,14,692.61 and disconnecting the electricity supply. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 27-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    2nd Addl District Judge

  4. 25-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    2nd Addl District Judge

  5. 11-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    2nd Addl District Judge

  6. 11-Feb-2026

    Final Arguments

    2nd Addl District Judge

  7. 29-Jan-2026

    Final Arguments

    2nd Addl District Judge

  8. 23-Jan-2026

    Final Arguments

    2nd Addl District Judge

  9. 09-Jan-2026

    Final Arguments

    2nd Addl District Judge

  10. 19-Dec-2025

    For R&P

    2nd Addl District Judge

  11. 14-Nov-2025

    For R&P

    Addl. District Judge

  12. 10-Oct-2025

    For R&P

    Addl. District Judge

  13. 12-Sep-2025

    For R&P

    Addl. District Judge

  14. 18-Jul-2025

    For R&P

    Addl. District Judge

  15. 13-Jun-2025

    For R&P

    Addl. District Judge

  16. 25-Apr-2025

    For R&P

    2nd Addl District Judge

  17. 28-Feb-2025

    For R&P

    2nd Addl District Judge

  18. 17-Jan-2025

    Notice To Respondents

    2nd Addl District Judge

  19. 20-Dec-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  20. 20-Dec-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 49/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The 2nd Additional District Judge, Junagadh allowed the appeal and set aside the trial court's judgment dismissing the plaintiff's suit. The court held that the electricity distribution company failed to prove electricity theft against the ice factory owner because: (1) no meter testing was conducted by an Electrical Inspector or independent expert; (2) the anomaly code found in the meter was not definitively proven to indicate theft rather than a technical fault; and (3) no provisional bill was issued as mandated by the Electricity Act. The company is barred from recovering the supplementary bill of ₹9,14,692.61 and disconnecting the electricity supply. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case