RSA-5720- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 227 UHBVNL Sub Urban, Sub Division, Gharaunda Ram Dhari CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. concurrent findings rendered by both the Court below whereby the suit declaration respondent 2. 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 Sub Divisional Officer and Another 3. and the suit filed by the respondent ground of jurisdiction. However, the respondent take recourse to the appropriate remedy as law. -2015 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA Date of Decision: UHBVNL Sub Urban, Sub Division, Gharaunda Versus Ram Dhari CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. SK Mahajan, Advocate for the appellant. NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The appellant-defendant is in concurrent findings rendered by both the Court below whereby the suit declaration with consequential relief of mandatory injunction respondent-plaintiff was 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 RSA-4181-2016, title Sub Divisional Officer and Another’ vide judgment dated 14.05.2025. In view of the above, the present and the suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff ground of jurisdiction. However, the respondent take recourse to the appropriate remedy as IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA-5720-2015 (O&M) Date of Decision: 31.07.2025 UHBVNL Sub Urban, Sub Division, Gharaunda .… Appellant .... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Advocate for the appellant. is in second appeal against the concurrent findings rendered by both the Court below whereby the suit for with consequential relief of mandatory injunction filed by the outset, learned counsel for the appellant 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 , titled as ‘Mahesh Kumar vs. vide judgment dated 14.05.2025. the present second appeal is allowed, plaintiff stands dismissed on the ground of jurisdiction. However, the respondent-plaintiff is at liberty to take recourse to the appropriate remedy as available, in accordance with for filed by the 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 vs. stands dismissed on the is at liberty to , in accordance with RISHU KATARIA 2025.08.01 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. RSA-5720- 4. made in the impu judicata in any subsequent proceedings initiated by the respondent plaintiff. 5. 31.07.2025 rishu -2015 (O&M) -2- 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 .2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable It is made clear that any evidence recorded/observations gned judgments and decrees would not operate as res in any subsequent proceedings initiated by the respondent- Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No It is made clear that any evidence recorded/observations res RISHU KATARIA 2025.08.01 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.