HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2418 of 2025 M/S Q.B. Lounge ......Petitioner Versus Uttarakhand Power Corporation Ltd. And another ….Respondents Present: Mr. Parikshit Saini, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Dharmendra Barthwal, Advocate for the respondents. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J.(Oral) The petitioner seeks direction to the respondent no.1 to shift their electricity meter within the occupied premises of the petitioner. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. The petitioner is a partnership firm, which is in the business of running a restaurant and bar in the name and style of M/S Q.B. Lounge, which is on lease taken from the respondent no.2 M/S Axiom Estate Consultants Pvt. Ltd. There has been a dispute between the petitioner and the respondent no.2 as the respondent no.2 wanted to take forcible possession of the premises leased out to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner was compelled to file a Civil Suit bearing Original Suit No. 358 of 2023, M/S QB Lounge and others Vs. M/S Axiom Estate consultants Pvt. Ltd. and another in the court of 1st Addition Senior Civil Judge, Dehradun (“the Civil Suit”), seeking 2 injunction against the respondent no.2 so that the respondent no.2 may not intervene into the peaceful possession of the petitioner in the premises under lease. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that earlier the electricity meter was fixed at a common place, but the respondent no.2 has shifted it at a place which is in his exclusive control and it affects the smooth functioning of the petitioner’s business. Therefore, the petitioner seeks direction that the respondent no.1 be directed to shift the electricity meter from its current location to the premises under occupation of the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has had some dispute with the lessor i.e. respondent no.2. The civil suit was filed in which on 04.08.2023, an order of status quo has been passed. But, it is argued that violating this order, the respondent no.2 had shifted the electricity meter from common place to a place, which is under the exclusive control of the respondent no.2. Therefore, he seeks directions. 6. The petitioner had already filed a suit for injunction against the respondent no.2 seeking direction that the respondent no.2 may not interfere in the peaceful possession of the petitioner and he shall not disconnect the electricity and water connections as well. 3 7. The Court, in the Civil Suit, on 04.08.2023 has been pleased to pass status quo order. Now, if thereafter, any change in the location of the electricity meter has been made, which affects the electricity supply to the petitioner, the petitioner has a cause to raise it in the civil suit itself. The order of the civil court may be enforced by the civil court only. For this purpose, a writ petition may not be entertained. Accordingly, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed at the stage of admission itself. 8. The writ petition is dismissed in limine. (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 18.08.2025 Jitendra