Allowed¶18

Sub Divisional Officer (Op) Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Sub Urban Division Karnal and Anr. v. Raj Kumar

Punjab & Haryana HC4 Nov 2025RSA/596/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

UHBVN / Sub Divisional Officer (Karnal) v. Raj Kumar — regular second appeal allowed; plaintiff's suit dismissed as barred by jurisdiction under Section 145, Electricity Act 2003, in view of Division Bench decision in Mahesh Kumar, RSA-4181-2016 (dated 14.05.2025); liberty to pursue available remedies preserved; evidence and observations of courts below not to operate as res judicata in fresh proceedings; respondent unrepresented despite service.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed; suit of the plaintiff-respondent dismissed on the ground of jurisdiction; liberty to avail remedies as available in law; pending applications, if any, disposed off. ¶18

Sub Divisional Officer (Op) Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Sub Urban Division Karnal and Anr. Vs Raj Kumar — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

117

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

RSA-596-2021 (O&M) Date of Decision : 04.11.2025

¶4

Sub Divisional Officer (OP) Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Sub Urban Division Karnal and Anr.

¶5

... Appellant(s)

¶6

Versus

¶7

Raj Kumar ... Respondent(s)

¶8

CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN

¶9

Present : Mr. Vinod Kumar Kaushal, Advocate for the appellants.

¶10

None for the respondent.

¶11

ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral)

¶12

The defendant-appellants are in regular second appeal challenging the judgment and decree passed by the First Appellate Court whereby their appeal was dismissed and the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court in favour of the plaintiff-respondent was affirmed.

¶13

At the outset, learned counsel for the defendant-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 [Mahesh Kumar Versus Sub Divisional Officer & Anr.] vide judgment dated 14.05.2025.

¶14

On 29.10.2025 none had put in appearance on behalf of the respondent despite service. Today also none has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent despite the matter being called twice.

¶15

ANKUR GOYAL 2025.11.06 08:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment

¶16

--2--

¶17

RSA-596-2021 (O&M)

¶18

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.

¶19

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.

¶20

04.11.2025 ( ALKA SARIN ) Ankur Goyal JUDGE

¶21

04.11.2025

¶22

NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO

¶23

ANKUR GOYAL 2025.11.06 08:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment

Sub Divisional Officer (Op) Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Sub Urban Division Karnal and Anr. v. Raj Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sub Divisional Officer (Op) Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Sub Urban Division Karnal and Anr. v. Raj Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Beant Kaur Vs Raj Kumar

Raj Kumar Vs Beant Kaur

Meena Rani and Ors. Vs Pankaj Bindal

Himmat Rai Vs Abdul Hamid & Ors.

Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and Others Vs Dr. S. Nanda Kapoor and Others

Raj Kumar Bhatia Vs Asjpl Pathria and Another