IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 105 Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and others Saurabh Vashist CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GUPTA 1. against the concurrent findings of the learned Courts below whereby the suit filed by the injunction 2. appellants/defendants 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 2016, title Another’ RSA-1096-2021 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No.1096 of 2021 Date of decision :-11.07.2025 Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and others Versus Saurabh Vashist CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Surinder K. Mahajan, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Mithun, Advocate for Mr. Abhishek Jindal, Advocate for the respondent. NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) The appellants/defendants have against the concurrent findings of the learned Courts below whereby the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff injunction and permanent injunction has been At the very outset, learned counsel for appellants/defendants 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 , titled as ‘Mahesh Kumar vs. Sub Divisional Officer and ’ vide judgment dated 14.05.2025. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No.1096 of 2021 (O & M) .2025 Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and others …..Appellants …..Respondent HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Surinder K. Mahajan, Advocate Mr. Abhishek Jindal, Advocate for the respondent. s/defendants have filed the present appeal against the concurrent findings of the learned Courts below whereby respondent/plaintiff for declaration, mandatory and permanent injunction has been decreed. 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 RSA-4181- Sub Divisional Officer and vide judgment dated 14.05.2025. VIJAY ASIJA 2025.07.11 17.02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3. dispute the aforesaid factual and legal position and submits that he has ‘no objection’, in case, the pres terms of judgment dated 14.05.2025 (supra). 4. allowed, dismissed on the ground of jurisdiction. However, the respondent/plaintiff remedy as 5. made in the impugned judgments and decrees would not operate as res judicata respondent/plaintiff 6. July 11, 202 Vijay Asija Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes RSA-1096-2021 (O & M) Learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff does not dispute the aforesaid factual and legal position and submits that he has ‘no objection’, in case, the present second appeal is disposed of, in terms of judgment dated 14.05.2025 (supra). In view of the above, the present and the suit filed by the dismissed on the ground of jurisdiction. However, the espondent/plaintiff is at liberty to take recourse to the appropriate remedy as available, in accordance with law. It is made clear that any evidence recorded/observations made in the impugned judgments and decrees would not operate as icata 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 respondent/plaintiff does not dispute the aforesaid factual and legal position and submits that he has ent second appeal is disposed of, in terms of judgment dated 14.05.2025 (supra). the present second appeal is and the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff stands dismissed on the ground of jurisdiction. However, the is at liberty to take recourse to the appropriate law. 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 Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2025.07.11 17.02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document