P.G.V.C.L. LIMBDI RURAL SUB DIVISION vs RAJABHAI DEVSHIBHAI GAMARA (ex parte) — 143/2025

Case under Electricity Act, 2003 Section 126. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED on 24th March 2026.

Case disposed

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJSN030005922025

Filing Number

143/2025

Filing Date

11-Mar-2025

Registration No

143/2025

Registration Date

11-Mar-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, LIMBDI

Judge

22-Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

24-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--ALLOWED

Last updated 29-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Electricity Act, 2003 Section 126

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.P.G.V.C.L. LIMBDI RURAL SUB DIVISION

    Adv. K B SHAH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.RAJABHAI DEVSHIBHAI GAMARA (ex parte)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 24-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case Summary: RCS-143/2025 Court Decision: The Additional Civil Judge at Limbdi decreed the electricity company's claim for recovery of unauthorized electricity charges. The court found the defendant liable for ₹15,204.59 in unpaid electricity bills plus 6% annual interest from the date of the claim until full payment, and ordered recovery from the defendant's person and property. Key Reasoning: The court established unauthorized electricity usage (697 watts detected during inspection) based on checking sheets, inspection reports, and company witness testimony. The defendant appeared ex parte (without legal representation) and provided no credible defense. Under Section 126 of the Electricity Act 2003, unauthorized consumption is a civil matter requiring only proof of the unauthorized use and resulting loss—not criminal intent. The electricity company's inspection reports and documentary evidence were accepted as authoritative, with the burden on the consumer to disprove them. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 24-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 20-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 09-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  6. 23-Feb-2026

    Judgement

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  7. 13-Feb-2026

    Judgement

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  8. 03-Feb-2026

    Judgement

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  9. 03-Jan-2026

    Judgement

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  10. 01-Dec-2025

    Judgement

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  11. 15-Nov-2025

    Judgement

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  12. 17-Oct-2025

    Judgement

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  13. 06-Oct-2025

    Final Arguments

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  14. 22-Sep-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  15. 13-Sep-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  16. 25-Aug-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  17. 12-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Appellant

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  18. 28-Apr-2025

    Evidence Of Appellant

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  19. 28-Mar-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  20. 11-Mar-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 143/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: RCS-143/2025 Court Decision: The Additional Civil Judge at Limbdi decreed the electricity company's claim for recovery of unauthorized electricity charges. The court found the defendant liable for ₹15,204.59 in unpaid electricity bills plus 6% annual interest from the date of the claim until full payment, and ordered recovery from the defendant's person and property. Key Reasoning: The court established unauthorized electricity usage (697 watts detected during inspection) based on checking sheets, inspection reports, and company witness testimony. The defendant appeared ex parte (without legal representation) and provided no credible defense. Under Section 126 of the Electricity Act 2003, unauthorized consumption is a civil matter requiring only proof of the unauthorized use and resulting loss—not criminal intent. The electricity company's inspection reports and documentary evidence were accepted as authoritative, with the burden on the consumer to disprove them. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case