##PAGE1##

1

RSA-439-2025 (O&M)

[137] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

RSA-439-2025 (O&M)

Date of Decision : 03.02.2026

Dakshin Haryana Bijli

Vikran Nigam and another …Appellants

versus

Gurpreet Singh and another ….Respondents

Coram : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN

Present: Mr. S.K. Mahajan, Advocate for the appellants.

****

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL)

[1] Defendant is in appeal. For convenience the parties hereinafter

are referred to as by their original position before the Court of First Instance

i.e., the appellant as defendant and the respondent as plaintiff.

[2] The plaintiff instituted a suit seeking a decree of declaration to

the effect that the checking report dated 20.09.2014, the demand raised vide

memos No.1881 and 1882 both dated 28.10.2014, as well as the short

assessment memo No.175 dated 06.07.2015, be declared illegal, null and

void and not binding upon him. A further relief of permanent injunction was

sought restraining the defendant from disconnecting the electricity

connection of the plaintiff and from effecting recovery of the amount of

₹42,287/-.

[3] The plaintiff is a consumer of electricity supplied by the

defendant. On 20.09.2014, the officials of the defendant department

RAJNEESH SHARMA

2026.02.11 10:38 conducted a checking of the premises of the plaintiff and allegedly found

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

2

RSA-439-2025 (O&M)

that the electricity meter installed at the premises did not tally with the serial

number recorded in the official records of the Nigam. Consequently thereto,

the plaintiff was served with demand notices by the defendant alleging

commission of theft of electricity.

[4] The Trial Court, upon appreciation of the pleadings and the

evidence brought on record, decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff.

[5] Aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the Trial

Court, the defendant preferred an appeal before the Lower Appellate Court.

[6] The Lower Appellate Court partly allowed the appeal filed by

the defendant. While upholding the finding of the learned Trial Court

declaring the assessment orders to be illegal, null and void, the Lower

Appellate Court accepted the appeal to the extent of the declaration with

regard to the notice of compounding, holding that the notice of

compounding as well as the checking report could not be termed as unlawful

or unjustified.

[7] Learned counsel for the appellant does not dispute the fact that

although theft of electricity has been alleged against the plaintiff consumer,

till date neither any FIR has been registered nor any complaint has been filed

before the competent court, as contemplated under the bare provisions of

law. He, however, submits that the consumer could not have approached the

Civil Court, as the jurisdiction to try cases relating to theft of electricity

under Sections 135 to 140 and Section 150 of the Electricity Act, 2003 vests

exclusively with the Special Court constituted under Section 153 of the said

Act. He submits that the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is barred under

Section 145 of the electricity act, 2003.

RAJNEESH SHARMA

2026.02.11 10:38

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

3

RSA-439-2025 (O&M)

[8] The issue w.r.t procedure to be followed in the case of theft and

the effect thereof on the jurisdiction of the Civil Court has been elaborately

explained by this Court in RSA No.1952 of 2024 titled as ‘Sub Divisional

Officer and another vs. Smt. Kamla Devi’, decided on 27.10.2025 after

considering the ratio of law laid down by Division Bench of this Court in

RSA No.4181 of 2016 titled as ‘Mahesh Kumar vs. Sub Divisional

Officers and another’ decided on 14.05.2025. This Court concluded as

under:

“xxx xxx xxx

20. Likewise Chapter VIII has been incorporated in the Punjab Supply

Code, 2014. Chapter VIII in the Supply Code, 2014 deals with

unauthorized use of electricity and theft of electricity in State of Punjab.

21. In view of the discussion held hereinabove and the scheme of the

Act of 2003, it is held as under:

(i) On