Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2015 DAILYLAW 2042 (HP)

VIKRANT SOOD v. RAM KUMARI

CR/86/2015 · 2026-06-05

Jiya Lal Bhardwaj

body2015

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CR No.86 of 2015 Decided on: 05.06 .2026 Uploaded on: 05.06.2026 ____________________________________________________________ Vikrant Sood ...Petitioner Versus Ram Kumari Sood and others ...Respondents _____________________________________________________________ Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the petitioner: Mr. Anuj Gupta, Advocate. For the respondents: Names of respondent Nos.1 & 8, stand deleted in terms of orders dated 13.10.2025 and 16.09.2015, respectively. Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate, for respondent Nos.2 to 4. None for respondent Nos.5 and 6. Respondent No.7 proceeded against ex-parte. Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge (Oral) CMP No. 27633 of 2025 By way of present application, the applicant/petitioner has sought permission to withdraw the present petition. The statements of applicant/petitioner Vikrant Sood and respondent No.2, Gopal Sood who is also 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 General Power of Attorney of respondent No.4 have been recorded separately. 2. In view of the compromise arrived at inter-se the applicant/petitioner and the contesting respondents, the application is allowed, however subject to the terms of statements made before this Court. 3. In case the parties do not abide by the terms of the statement made in the Court, the respondents/landlords shall have liberty to file an application for revival of the revision petition, only for the purpose of determining the use and occupation charges. However, it is made clear that this order shall not have any effect on the execution of the order passed by the Rent Controller, which has been affirmed by the Appellate Authority and also for any use and occupation charges in terms of the order passed by the Rent Controller. Further it is made clear that the Court has not given any decision on quantum of use and occupation charges in the petition. 4. Accordingly, revision petition is permitted to be withdrawn. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 05 th June, 2026 ( Jiya Lal Bhardwaj ) (Anurag) Judge