Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd v. Vijay Arya
221-94
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH RSA-1920-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision : 01.08.2025 UTTAR HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LTD ... Appellant(s)
Versus
VIJAY ARYA ... Respondent(s) CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN
Present:
Mr. B.R. Mahajan, Senior Advocate with Mr. S.K. Mahajan, Advocate for the appellant(s). Mr. Govind Chauhan, 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 the appeal filed by the plaintiff-respondent 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. Yogesh Sharma 2025.08.07 11:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judgment/order.
Chandigarh
RSA-1920-2024 (O&M) -2However, the plaintiff-respondent would have the 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-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 11:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judgment/order.
Chandigarh