Usha Devi v. Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited And Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP-11173-2026 Date of Decision: 10.04.2026 USHA DEVI
...Petitioner
Vs.
DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED AND OTHERS
...Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Mr. Prateek Rathee, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Ravish Kaushik, Advocate for respondent-UHBVNL *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1.
The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondents No.2&3 to decide his representation dated 05.04.2026 seeking reinstallation of the electricity meter and restoration of electricity supply. 2.
The petitioner entered into a sale agreement dated 14.03.2008 with respondent No.4 for purchase of the subjected property. Respondent No.4 despite her requests did not execute sale deed and threatened to alienate and dispossess her. She filed civil suit dated 30.06.2023 before Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Gurugram seeking decree for specific performance of sale agreement 14.03.2008 and to execute sale deed. She also prayed for permanent injunction DEEPAK BISSYAN 2026.04.10 15:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-11173-2026 -2against respondent No.4. The Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Gurugram vide order dated 11.07.2023 granted status quo qua subjected property. Respondent No.4 in connivance with officials of respondent no.1 on 01.04.2026 got removed electricity meter from the subjected land. Petitioner has filed contempt petition against respondents No.2 to 4 for violating order granting status quo. She preferred representation dated 05.04.2026 to respondents No.1 to 3 seeking reinstallation of electricity meter and restoration of the connection but the same has not been addressed till date.
3.
Learned counsel for respondent submits that petitioner has already filed contempt petition and has further remedy to approach Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (for short 'CGRF'). 4.
In view of the fact that petitioner has already filed contempt petition and has remedy to approach CGRF, this Court does not find it appropriate to interfere in the matter.
5.
Disposed of 6.
The petitioner may avail remedy as permissible by law. 7.
Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE April 10, 2026 Deepak DPA Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No DEEPAK BISSYAN 2026.04.10 15:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document