NIDHI GUPTA v. Sub Division
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 17 Feb 2026
- Bench
- NIDHI GUPTA
Outcome
Allowed
e present second appeal is allowed,
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Pending application(s), if any, s any, shall stands disposed of. 2026
Judgment
M: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH NIDHI GUPTA Present: - Mr. Divanshu Jain and Mr. Abh r. Abhinav Goel, Advocates for the appellant(s). te for Mr. Vikas Malik, Advocate for for the respondents. Mr. BK Saini, Advocate for the NIDHI GUP I GUPTA, J. (ORAL)
The appellant-defendant(s) are are in second appeal against the judgment of ent of reversal dated 27.01.2025 pass passed by the learned Additional District Judg t Judge, Moga whereby the appeal file eal filed by the plaintiff/respondents was allowed llowed, setting aside the judgment a ment and decree dated 01.09.2018 passed by th by the learned trial Court; and sui nd suit for declaration, mandatory injunction an tion and consequential relief of perman permanent injunction was allowed.
At the very outset, learned rned counsel for the appellant(s) submits that that the question of law involved s to volved in the present appeal as to whether juris er jurisdiction of the Civil Court is bar 5 of t is barred in view of Section 145 of the Electricit ectricity Act, 2003, has since been dec en decided by the Hon’ble Division Bench of th of this Court in RSA-4181-2016, ti vs. , titled as ‘Mahesh Kumar vs. Sub Division ivisional Officer and Another’ vide j vide judgment dated 14.05.2025. RISHU KATARIA 2026.02.18 17:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. RSA-2008- -2025 (O&M) -2-
Operative part
In view of the above, the prese e present second appeal is allowed, and the suit e suit filed by the respondent-plaint plaintiffs stands dismissed on the ground of ju d of jurisdiction. However, the respond ty to espondent-plaintiffs are at liberty to take recours ecourse to the appropriate remedy as dy as available, in accordance with law.
It is made clear that any ev ny evidence recorded/observations made in the in the impugned judgments and decr d decrees would not operate as res judicata in in any subsequent proceedings ings initiated by the respondent- plaintiffs.
Pending application(s), if any, s any, shall stands disposed of. 2026
17.02.2026 ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No RISHU KATARIA 2026.02.18 17:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: e present second appeal is allowed,
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 17 Feb 2026. The bench was NIDHI GUPTA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.