DGVCL vs FARIDA FARUK MULLA — 18/2026
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 2. Disposed: Uncontested--EX-PARTE JUDGEMENT on 18th April 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJSR050000632026
Filing Number
18/2026
Filing Date
09-01-2026
Registration No
18/2026
Registration Date
09-01-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, MANGROL
Judge
3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Decision Date
18th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--EX-PARTE JUDGEMENT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
DGVCL
Adv. J B GOHIL
Respondent(s)
FARIDA FARUK MULLA
Hearing History
Judge: 3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
SUMMONS - NOTICE
SUMMONS - NOTICE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 08-04-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 13-03-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
| 23-02-2026 | SUMMONS - NOTICE |
| 05-02-2026 | SUMMONS - NOTICE |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: RCS 18/2026 Court Decision: The Principal Senior Civil Judge, Mangrol (Surat) partly allowed DGVCL's suit against defendant Farida Faruk Mulla for electricity bill recovery. The court ordered the defendant to pay Rs. 1,21,586-41/- (the disputed electricity bill amount arising from illegal wire connection/electricity theft detected during inspection) plus 9% simple interest per annum from the suit filing date until realization, rejecting the plaintiff's claimed 16% interest rate due to insufficient documentary proof of the higher rate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary: RCS 18/2026 Court Decision: The Principal Senior Civil Judge, Mangrol (Surat) partly allowed DGVCL's suit against defendant Farida Faruk Mulla for electricity bill recovery. The court ordered the defendant to pay Rs. 1,21,586-41/- (the disputed electricity bill amount arising from illegal wire connection/electricity theft detected during inspection) plus 9% simple interest per annum from the suit filing date until realization, rejecting the plaintiff's claimed 16% interest rate due to insufficient documentary proof of the higher rate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts