( 2025:HHC:8620 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Civil Revision No.1 of 2017. Decided on : 1 st April, 2025. Sanjay Grover ...Petitioner. Versus Usha Rani Sahni & Ors. ....Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Devyani Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Basant Pal Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Sudhir Thakur, Senior Advocate with Mr. Somesh Sharma, Advocate. Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral). This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner/tenant under Section 24(5) of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 against the order of eviction passed against him by the learned Rent Controller-II, Solan, on 18.08.2015 in Rent Petition No. 16/2 of 2010 and upheld by the learned Appellate Authority-I, Solan, on 06.09.2016 in Rent Appeal No. 2-S/14 of 2016. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. During the pendency of this petition, the parties have negotiated an amicable resolution to the dispute. It was proposed that tenant/petitioner will not press the grounds as raised in the instant petition provided that the respondent/landlord will allow him to occupy the premises till 30th June, 2026. The respondent agreed to the proposal and accordingly the dispute has been set at rest in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties. 3. Petitioner/tenant Dr. Sanjay Grover is present in Court today. He has submitted an undertaking by way of affidavit. He has undertaken to vacate the premises in question on or before 30th June, 2026 and to handover its peaceful and vacant possession to the respondent. He has further undertaken to pay the use and occupation charges @ Rs.11,000/- per month in the bank account provided to him by the respondent w.e.f. 01.07.2025 till he vacates the premises, on or before 7th of every calendar month. 4. The terms of undertaking filed by the petitioner/tenant are accepted by the learned counsel for the respondent/landlord and he agrees that the respondent will …2… ( 2025:HHC:8620 ) not execute the eviction order in case the petitioner/tenant abides by the terms of the undertaking. 5. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of by affirming the eviction order passed by the learned Rent Controller and affirmed by the learned Appellate Authority against the petitioner. However, the respondent/landlord shall not execute the order of eviction in case the petitioner abides by the terms of the undertaking furnished today in the Court, which has been accepted. In case, the petitioner violates any of the terms of the undertaking so furnished by him, the order of eviction passed against him shall become immediately executable at the option of the respondent. 6. The petitioner is stated to have deposited the use and occupation charges in the Registry of this Court upto June, 2025. The same shall be released to the respondent/landlord by remission in his bank account, details whereof have been given in para-3 of the affidavit/undertaking. It is made clear to the petitioner that in case of violation of any of the terms of undertaking filed by him, it will not only render the eviction order executable, but …3… ( 2025:HHC:8620 ) the petitioner shall also be liable to be proceeded against under the Contempt of Courts Act. 7. The instant petition stands disposed of in the above terms. (Satyen Vaidya) Judge 1st April, 2025. (jai) …4… ( 2025:HHC:8620 )