P.G.V.C.L KOTDASANGANI vs MANSUKHBHAI VALLABHBHAI — 117/2025

Case under Gujarat Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1979 Section 03. Disposed: Uncontested--EX-PARTE JUDGEMENT on 07th April 2026.

Case disposed

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJRJ030019592025

Filing Number

117/2025

Filing Date

02-Dec-2025

Registration No

117/2025

Registration Date

02-Dec-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, KOTDA SANGANI

Judge

1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

07-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--EX-PARTE JUDGEMENT

Last updated 16-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Gujarat Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1979 Section 03

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.P.G.V.C.L KOTDASANGANI

    Adv. M C DAVE

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.MANSUKHBHAI VALLABHBHAI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-Apr-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Summary In RCS No. 117/2025, a Rajkot civil court partially allowed the plaintiff electricity company's claim against the defendant for unpaid electricity charges of Rs. 7,4937-00 with interest. The court ruled that the defendant is liable to pay the claimed amount at 6% annual interest from the date of filing until full payment, finding that the defendant had illegally bypassed the meter and committed electricity theft. The court directed the defendant to pay both the principal amount and court costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 28-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 02-Dec-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 117/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary In RCS No. 117/2025, a Rajkot civil court partially allowed the plaintiff electricity company's claim against the defendant for unpaid electricity charges of Rs. 7,4937-00 with interest. The court ruled that the defendant is liable to pay the claimed amount at 6% annual interest from the date of filing until full payment, finding that the defendant had illegally bypassed the meter and committed electricity theft. The court directed the defendant to pay both the principal amount and court costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case