THAWAR SINGH v. DHBVNL THROUGH MANAGING DIRECTOR AND OTHERS
RSA/2216/2023 · 2025-07-14
Vikas Suri
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 64438 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 64438 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 224 RSA-2216-2023 (O&M) Date of Decision: 14.07.2025 Thawar Singh ....Appellant Versus Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and others ....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI
---- Present: Ms. Anuradha, Advocate for Mr. Shashikant Gupta, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Anil Chawla, Advocate for the respondents.
**** VIKAS SURI, J. (Oral)
1. The plaintiff-appellant in present Regular Second Appeal has challenged the judgment and decree dated 01.03.2023 passed by the First Appellate Court, whereby the appeal preferred by respondent-Nigam was accepted, and the judgment and decree dated 21.11.2022 passed by the Trial Court decreeing the suit, was set aside and resultantly, the suit was dismissed by the First Appellate Court.
2. At the outset, learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellants has submitted 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 Mahesh Kumar Versus Sub Divisional Officer and another, vide judgment dated 14.05.2025.
VARINDER PRASHAD 2025.07.15 14:13 I attest to the accuracy of this document PHHC
RSA-2216-2023 (O&M) -2-
3.
Learned counsel for the defendant-respondents does not dispute this factual position.
4. In view thereof, the present appeal is allowed, and the suit filed by the plaintiff-appellant stands dismissed on the ground of jurisdiction. However, the plaintiff-appellant would be at liberty to avail the remedies as available in law.
5. It is made clear that any evidence recorded/observations made in the impugned judgments and decrees would not operate as res judicata in any subsequent proceedings initiated by the plaintiff-appellant.
6. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(VIKAS SURI) July 14, 2025 JUDGE Varinder Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No VARINDER PRASHAD 2025.07.15 14:13 I attest to the accuracy of this document PHHC