Registered Deed, No Meter: Charminar Shop Buyers Lose Power Connection Plea in Telangana HC
The Telangana High Court on October 27, 2026 dismissed a writ petition by two buyers of shops in a Gulzar Houz, Charminar complex seeking new electricity connections, after TGSPDCL cited Rs. 1,97,570 in arrears on other connections, a house number mismatch and no Occupancy Certificate. A fresh application after compliance remains open.
Two buyers bought Shop Nos. 216 and 217 on the second floor of Bhagyalakshmi Commercial Complex at Gulzar Houz, Charminar, under a registered sale deed, Doc. No. 912 of 2024. On 30 June 2026 they applied to the Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited (TGSPDCL) for new electricity service connections. The application was rejected. Seven other connections in the same complex owed Rs. 1,97,570 in arrears, the house number in the application did not match the sale deed, and the building of Ground plus 4 floors had no Occupancy Certificate. On 27 October 2026 the Telangana High Court dismissed their writ petition.
The order, in Pavan Soni v. The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited, Writ Petition No. 18273 of 2026, was delivered by Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka. It concerns shops, but the three objections it records can apply to anyone buying a unit in an older Hyderabad building, whether a shop or a flat.
The short answer. The High Court found "no merits" in the petition and dismissed it, while saying it is "open to the petitioners to make new Application for release of service connections, after rectifying/complying with the objections raised by the Respondents." The objections were Rs. 1,97,570 in dues on seven other connections in the complex, a house number mismatch between the sale deed (H.No. 21-2-121 to 130, 131, 131/1 and 2) and the application (H.No. 21-2-121), and the absence of an Occupancy Certificate for a five floor building. The trade-off: a registered sale deed proved ownership, but it did not get the buyers a meter.
What did the High Court decide on 27 October 2026?
It dismissed the writ petition with no costs. The judge recorded that on a perusal of the online application and supporting documents, "it is seen that there is variation in respect of premises number." The court also noted the discom's submission of outstanding dues of Rs. 1,97,570 for the premises, and its contention that the building "is comprised of five floors without having Occupancy Certificate."
Because the application had already been rejected, the court left the buyers free to apply again after fixing the problems. It did not order the discom to release power. The case was reserved on 30.09.2026 and pronounced on 27.10.2026.
Why did the buyers say they were entitled to power?
Their counsel argued that the rejection was "due to some default in payment of electricity charges by some of the other shop owners in the ground and first floors of the said complex which has nothing to do with grant of new electricity service connection to the subject shops located in the 2nd floor." Counsel contended that when an owner applies for a new connection, it is "incumbent upon the respondents to release the same based on the title documents."
The buyers also said that even before they purchased, an earlier owner, Mr Rajender Kumar Agarwal, had approached the discom for supply to the same shops "but no action has been taken." So the power problem predated their purchase.
What did TGSPDCL tell the court?
The discom's standing counsel, who filed a counter affidavit, set out the application details: Regn. No. NR904264724472, filed on 30.6.2026 for Premises No. 21-2-121, Bhagya Laxmi Complex. On checking the uploaded sale deed, the discom found the premises number in the deed was "H.No. 21-2-121 to 130, 131, 131/1 and 2" while the application gave only "H.No. 21-2-121."
The discom also listed seven existing service connections in the complex with arrears that were "under disconnection", totalling Rs. 1,97,570, and said it had informed the buyers "to clear the dues as no new service connection can be released to the building having dues." It then added the Occupancy Certificate point, discussed below.
| Objection recorded | What the order says | What a buyer can check before paying |
|---|---|---|
| Arrears in the complex | Seven connections owed Rs. 1,97,570 in total, from Rs. 7,533 to Rs. 42,931 each | Ask for recent bills of all connections in the building, not only the unit |
| House number mismatch | Deed: H.No. 21-2-121 to 130, 131, 131/1 and 2. Application: H.No. 21-2-121 | Match the premises number in the deed with municipal and utility records |
| No Occupancy Certificate | Ground plus 4 floors, no OC furnished; discom cited the SC judgment for buildings above 10 metres | Ask the seller for the building's OC before signing |
| Earlier failed request | A previous owner had sought supply with no action taken | Ask whether any earlier application was made and how it ended |
| Outcome | Petition dismissed; fresh application allowed after compliance | Budget time and money for fixing defects after purchase |
What is the Occupancy Certificate point, and where does it come from?
The discom's counsel submitted that the building is Ground plus 4 floors and the buyers "have not furnished a copy of Occupancy Certificate, which is mandatory for releasing power supply to all the buildings which are above 10 meters of height", relying on the Supreme Court's judgment in Rajendra Kumar Barjatya v. U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad. The High Court recorded this submission and dismissed the petition, but did not separately analyse the 10 metre threshold.
The Supreme Court's judgment of 17 December 2024 in Rajendra Kumar Barjatya v. U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad, Civil Appeal No. 14604 of 2024, issued directions "in the larger public interest". Direction (iv) reads: "All the necessary service connections, such as, Electricity, water supply, sewerage connection, etc., shall be given by the service provider / Board to the buildings only after the production of the completion/occupation certificate."
The same set of directions says, in (i), that while issuing building planning permission, an undertaking be obtained from the builder that possession will be handed over "only after obtaining completion/occupation certificate", and in (xi), that "Banks / financial institutions shall sanction loan against any building as a security only after verifying the completion/occupation certificate issued to a building." Direction (xii) states that violation would lead to contempt proceedings in addition to prosecution under the respective laws.
Why does this matter to flat buyers, not only shop buyers?
The Supreme Court's direction on service connections refers to buildings generally, and its loan direction refers to "any building". The Hyderabad case shows a utility relying on that judgment in practice. A buyer who purchases a unit in a building without an Occupancy Certificate may find that the paperwork they hold for their own unit is not what the utility asks for.
PropNewz has covered related disputes over possession offered without an Occupancy Certificate, including the NCDRC ruling on Mahagun Meadows and Logix Heights, and a Karnataka tribunal view that an OC is not a procedural formality in the Casa Grande Lorenza case. The Charminar order adds a practical angle: the OC question can surface at the moment a buyer simply asks for a meter.
What should buyers in older Hyderabad buildings check?
Treat utilities as part of title due diligence. The Charminar buyers had a registered deed from 2024, but the building's history, other owners' unpaid bills and a numbering inconsistency all came back to them. Before paying for a unit in an older or mixed use building, work through these steps.
- Ask the seller for the building's Occupancy Certificate, and note the number of floors against what the OC covers.
- Ask for the latest electricity bills for the unit and, where possible, for the other connections in the building.
- Ask whether any connection in the building is under disconnection for arrears.
- Check that the premises or house number in the sale deed matches the number on tax receipts and utility records.
- If the deed lists a range of house numbers, ask how the unit will be identified in utility applications.
- Ask whether the seller or any earlier owner applied for a connection and what reply was received.
- Get any agreement on clearing building level dues written into the sale agreement before you pay.
None of these steps guarantee a connection. They help a buyer see, before money changes hands, the issues that the discom raised here.
What can these buyers do now?
The court's order leaves one route open: a fresh application "after rectifying/complying with the objections raised by the Respondents." That means correcting the premises number, dealing with the dues the discom says attach to the building, and addressing the Occupancy Certificate point. The order does not say who must pay the arrears of other connections, and it does not decide whether the discom could lawfully refuse supply on that ground alone.
The order also does not say whether an Occupancy Certificate can be obtained for this building at all. Under the Supreme Court's direction (iii), a completion or occupation certificate is issued after inspection confirms construction matches the permission, and where deviations are noticed, issue "should be deferred, unless and until the deviations pointed out are completely rectified." The order does not address how long that process might take for this building.
Frequently asked questions
What did the Telangana High Court decide in Pavan Soni v. TGSPDCL?
Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka dismissed the writ petition on 27 October 2026, finding no merit in the shop buyers' plea for new electricity connections. The court left it open to them to apply again after rectifying or complying with the objections raised by TGSPDCL, but did not direct the discom to release supply.
Why was the power connection refused for the Charminar shops?
According to the order, TGSPDCL cited three grounds: seven other connections in the complex owed Rs. 1,97,570 in arrears, the house number in the application did not match the sale deed, and the Ground plus 4 floor building had no Occupancy Certificate, which the discom said was mandatory above 10 metres.
What does the Supreme Court's Barjatya judgment say about service connections?
Direction (iv) of the 17 December 2024 judgment says necessary service connections such as electricity, water supply and sewerage shall be given to buildings only after production of the completion or occupation certificate. Direction (xi) says banks shall sanction loans against a building only after verifying that certificate.
What should a buyer check about utilities before buying a unit?
Ask for the building's Occupancy Certificate, recent electricity bills for the unit and other connections, and any disconnection notices. Confirm that the house number in the sale deed matches tax and utility records, and ask whether any earlier connection application was made and what happened to it.
This article summarises a court order for general information and is not legal or investment advice.
Last updated 2026-11-08. PropNewz Team.
Contact Us
Stay updated with latest news and new projects!
Tell us what you want, We'll do the rest.
Share your budget and where you're looking. An advisor who has actually walked the sites will shortlist a handful of RERA-registered projects and tell you which to skip.