IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.484 of 2025 Date of Decision: 04.06.2025 _______________________________________________________ M/s. Kundlas Loh Udyog …….Petitioner Versus Ms. Isha, Executive Director (Pers.) HPSEBL ….Respondent _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Manik Sethi, Advocate. For the Respondent: Ms. Sunita Sharma, Senior Advocate, with Ms. Sugandh Verma, Advocate. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that the present petition has been rendered infructuous, on account of subsequent developments, whereby revised bill has been issued by the respondent but without adjusting the interest. He states that on account of aforesaid compliance, though this Court may close the proceedings at this stage, but liberty be reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate Court of law for interest. 2. Consequently, in view of the aforesaid statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, coupled with the subsequent 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 development as stated above, these proceedings are closed. Notice issued to the respondent is discharged. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate Court of law, qua issue of interest. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. p` (Sandeep Sharma), Judge June 04, 2025 (Shamsh Tabrez)