IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 110 S.D.O. (OP), Sub Division No.2, Uttar Haryana Nigam, Kaithal and another Santosh and another CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GUPTA J. 1. against the concurrent findings of the learned Courts below whereby the suit filed by permanent injunction has been 2. submits that the question of law involved in the present appeal as to whether jurisdiction of the Civil Court is barred in view of Section 145 of the Electricity Act, 2003, has since been decided by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in ‘Mahesh judgment dated 14.05.2025. RSA-992-2022 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No.992 of 2022 Date of decision :-15.07.2025 S.D.O. (OP), Sub Division No.2, Uttar Haryana Nigam, Kaithal and another Versus Santosh and another CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Surinder K. Mahajan, Advocate for the appellants. None for the respondents. NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) The appellants/defendants have against the concurrent findings of the learned Courts below whereby the suit filed by respondent No.1/plaintiff permanent injunction has been decreed. At the very outset, learned counsel for that the question of law involved in the present appeal as to whether jurisdiction of the Civil Court is barred in view of Section 145 of the Electricity Act, 2003, has since been decided by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in ‘Mahesh Kumar vs. Sub Divisional Officer and Another judgment dated 14.05.2025. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No.992 of 2022 (O & M) .2025 S.D.O. (OP), Sub Division No.2, Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran …..Appellants …..Respondents HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Surinder K. Mahajan, Advocate have filed the present appeal against the concurrent findings of the learned Courts below whereby respondent No.1/plaintiff for declaration and utset, learned counsel for the appellants that the question of law involved in the present appeal as to whether jurisdiction of the Civil Court is barred in view of Section 145 of the Electricity Act, 2003, has since been decided by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in RSA-4181-2016, titled as Sub Divisional Officer and Another’ vide VIJAY ASIJA 2025.07.16 19.35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3. allowed, dismissed on the ground of jurisdiction. No.1-plaintiff as available 4. made in the impugned judgments and decrees would not operat res judicata No.1-plaintiff 5. July 15, 202 Vijay Asija Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / Whether Reportable Yes / No RSA-992-2022 (O & M) In view of the above, the present and the suit filed by the respondent dismissed on the ground of jurisdiction. plaintiff is at liberty to take recourse to the appropriate remedy available, in accordance with law. It is made clear that any evidence recorded/observations made in the impugned judgments and decrees would not operat judicata in any subsequent proceedings initiated by the respondent plaintiff. Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of , 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No 2 the present second appeal is and the suit filed by the respondent No.1-plaintiff stands dismissed on the ground of jurisdiction. However, the respondent is at liberty to take recourse to the appropriate remedy It is made clear that any evidence recorded/observations made in the impugned judgments and decrees would not operate as in any subsequent proceedings initiated by the respondent Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2025.07.16 19.35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document