The Delhi High Court held that a tenant in lawful possession cannot be denied electricity merely because a landlord-tenant dispute is pending or due to absence of a landlord’s NOC. Recognising electricity as a basic necessity forming part of the right to life under Article 21, the Court directed restoration of supply after dues were cleared, clarifying that such restoration does not confer ownership or tenancy rights and will not affect pending civil proceedings.

Legal Issue

The primary issue before the High Court was whether a tenant in lawful possession of the premises could be denied restoration of electricity supply merely due to a pending landlord-tenant dispute and in the absence of a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the landlords. The Court was also required to consider whether denial of electricity amounted to violation of the fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Brief Facts

The petitioner, Shri Maiki Jain, claimed to be a lawful tenant in possession of the third floor of the property bearing No. GB-20, Shivaji Enclave, New Delhi since 2016 under registered lease deeds. A civil suit filed by the landlords seeking possession, arrears of rent, mesne profits and injunction was pending before the District Court, and the petitioner had also filed a counter-claim seeking restoration of essential services.

The electricity meter installed at the premises was registered in the names of the landlords. The petitioner had been regularly receiving electricity through the said meter and had been paying electricity charges to BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. Due to temporary financial hardship, the petitioner failed to clear electricity dues for September–October 2025, leading to disconnection of supply and removal of the meter on 28 November 2025. The petitioner cleared all outstanding dues on the same date and requested restoration of electricity, but the distribution company insisted on an NOC from the landlords, which was refused, compelling the petitioner to approach the High Court.

Court’s Analysis

The Court observed that a pending landlord-tenant dispute cannot be used as a ground to deprive a person in lawful possession of basic amenities such as electricity. It was noted that until an eviction order is passed by a competent court, the possession of the petitioner cannot be termed unlawful. The Court emphasized that electricity is a basic necessity and forms an integral part of the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Relying on settled judicial principles, the Court reiterated that no individual can be expected to live without access to essential amenities. The insistence on an NOC from the landlords, despite clearance of dues by the petitioner, was held to be unjustified. The Court clarified that restoration of electricity would not amount to recognition of any possessory or ownership rights in favour of the petitioner and would not prejudice the rights of parties in pending civil disputes.

Judgment

The High Court directed BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. to restore electricity supply to the third floor of the premises through the existing meter without insisting on an NOC from the landlords. The landlords were directed to cooperate in restoration, failing which the electricity supplier was permitted to seek police assistance. The petitioner was directed to comply with all commercial and codal requirements and to regularly pay electricity charges. It was clarified that non-payment in future would entitle the respondent to disconnect supply in accordance with law. With these directions, the writ petition and pending applications were disposed of.

Click here for the official judgement/order

Case Title

Shri Maiki Jain vs. BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors.

Court

High Court of Delhi, New Delhi

Case Number

W.P.(C) 18953/2025 along with CM APPL. 78893/2025 & CM APPL. 78894/2025

Date of Decision

15 December 2025

Bench

Hon’ble Ms. Justice Mini Pushkarna