Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited v. Aamir Khan

221-106

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH RSA-2128-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision : 01.08.2025 DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED ... Appellant(s)

Versus

AAMIR KHAN ... Respondent(s) CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN

Present:

Mr. Lekhraj Sharma, Advocate and Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate for the appellant(s). Mr. Sarfaraj Anjum Mor, Advocate for the respondent(s). ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral) 1.

The defendant-appellant is in the present Regular Second Appeal, challenging the judgment and decree passed by the First Appellate Court whereby its appeal was partly allowed.

2.

At the outset, learned counsel for the defendant-appellant 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 & Anr." vide judgment dated 14.05.2025. 3.

Learned counsel for the plaintiff-respondent does not dispute this factual position.

4.

In view thereof, the present appeal is allowed, and the suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent stands dismissed on the ground of jurisdiction. However, the plaintiff-respondent would have the liberty to avail the remedies as available in law.

Yogesh Sharma 2025.08.07 11:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judgment/order.

Chandigarh

RSA-2128-2025 (O&M) -25.

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-respondent. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off. 01.08.2025 Yogesh Sharma ( ALKA SARIN ) JUDGE NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO Yogesh Sharma 2025.08.07 11:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judgment/order.

Chandigarh