Delhi High Court rules electricity cannot be denied to lawful tenants due to landlord disputes

Electricity cannot be denied to lawful tenants (Representative image)

• Delhi High Court rules electricity is a fundamental right for lawful tenants
• Tenants can't be denied power due to landlord disputes if dues are cleared
• Ruling protects tenants from unfair eviction tactics over essential utilities

Did our AI summary help?

In a ruling delivered on December 15, 2025 (Maiki Jain v. BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors. W.P.(C) 18953/2025), the Delhi High Court held that access to electricity is a fundamental right. The court clarified that a tenant who is lawfully occupying a property cannot be denied electricity merely because a legal dispute is pending with the landlord.

The petitioner, Maiki Jain, stated that he has been in lawful possession of the third floor of property No. GB-20, Shivaji Enclave, New Delhi since 2016, based on duly registered lease agreements.

“The Court noted that the tenant had been in continuous and lawful possession of the premises since 2016, supported by multiple registered lease deeds. Although the electricity meter stood in the landlords’ names, the tenant had been receiving electricity and paying bills directly to BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. The supply was disconnected on 28 November, 2025 due to temporary non-payment of dues for September - October 2025, but those dues were subsequently cleared in full,” said Alay Razvi, Managing Partner, Accord Juris.

Despite this, BSES refused restoration solely because the landlords declined to issue a No-Objection Certificate (NOC), citing an ongoing civil suit for possession, arrears and mesne profits. This led the tenant to file a case in the Delhi High Court.

Counsel for BSES Rajdhani informed the court that the electricity meter had been placed under the landlord’s lock and key, and in the absence of his cooperation, the utility was unable to restore the power supply.

The High Court rejected this stance, holding that once lawful possession and clearance of dues are established, an electricity distributor cannot insist on a landlord’s consent. Pending civil litigation, the Court held, cannot be used as a tool to deprive an occupant of essential services or to indirectly coerce eviction.

“The judgment draws a clear line, utilities are not bargaining chips, and service providers cannot invent conditions like a landlord’s NOC when the statutory and commercial requirements are otherwise fulfilled,” said Raheel Patel, Partner, Gandhi Law Associates.

This ruling sets an important precedent. It protects tenants from unfair pressure during disputes and ensures that basic utilities like electricity remain uninterrupted until a court decides otherwise. “No one can be deprived of electricity as long as their possessions are lawful and outstanding dues are clear”, said Sahil Sharma, Senior Associate, Legum Solis.

Court verdict makes it clear that “distribution companies perform a public function and must act fairly, reasonably and constitutionally. They cannot facilitate private coercion or indirect eviction by withholding essential services,” Razvi said.