Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Hemant Chandangoudar, J
J.Seethalakshmi – Appellant
Versus
Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO, Tirunelveli – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to rejection of electricity disconnection request. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments on code violation and prior consents. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. ownership undisputed; code requires consent or possession proof. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. prior cases distinguished for lack of possession evidence. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. order quashed; disconnection directed, civil remedy preserved. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
O R D E R
The petitioner challenges the order dated 31.07.2025 passed by the third respondent. By the said order, the petitioner’s request for disconnection of the electricity supply granted to the fourth respondent in Service Connection No. 103-006-400 was rejected, and the petitioner was relegated to approach the jurisdictional Civil Court for agitating her rights.
2.The petitioner states that Survey No. 774/2 originally belonged to Krishnaswamy Naidu, who was her father-in-law. Upon his death, the said property devolved upon his legal heirs, and thereafter, the property was allotted to the share of the petitioner through a registered partition deed dated 27.01.2010. The fourth respondent claims that, in a portion of the said property, a Distribution Transformer (DT) was
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
