IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA COPC No.538 of 2024 Decided on: 3rd July, 2025 _________________________________________________________________ Virender Kumar & Ors. ...Petitioners Versus Lalit Kumar & Ors. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioners: Mr. G.R.Palsra, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. K.B. Khajuria, Advocate. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Petitioners’ allegations are that the respondents have breached the undertaking given by them to the Court as recorded in judgment rendered in Virender Kumar and others Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others2. Operative part of the judgment, which was based upon the undertaking furnished by the respondents, reads as under: - “3. The petitioners have also filed affidavit dated 6th May, 2019 accepting the undertaking given by respondents No. 3, 5 and 6. The said affidavit is taken on record. In the said affidavit, the petitioners have stated as follows: 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 CWP No. 535 of 2018 decided on 09.05.2019 - 2 - “1. That we the above named deponents have agreed to give the share of the respondents No. 3 to 6 namely Sh. Lalit Kumar, Sh. Sachin Kumar, Smt. Poonam Kumari, and Smt. Sudershna Devi as per mode of partition prepared by the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, on 23.06.2011 in File No. 18/2006 as per their share defined in the revenue record, because the respondents No. 3 to 6 have agreed that if they wanted to sell their share then, they will give the first preference for sale to the deponents. 2. That we the deponents further declare that the above affidavit of our is true and correct to the best of our personal knowledge, no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed there from.” 4. The writ petition is disposed of in above terms with a direction to the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Balh, District Mandi, to finalize the partition proceedings within a period of two months.” 2. Petitioners’ grievance is that in terms of the undertaking, present respondents (respondents No.3 to 6 in CWP No. 535 of 2018) had agreed that if they wanted to sell their share in the land, they will give first preference for sale to the petitioners. Petitioners have filed this contempt petition with the allegations that respondents had breached their undertaking given to the Court and sold the land to Smt. Meena Devi vide registered sale deed dated 21.06.2024, without first offering the land for sale to the petitioners. 3. Respondents have filed reply to the contempt - 3 - petition. As per reply: - Respondents had issued notice to the petitioners, pointing out that in case petitioners were interested to purchase the land, then they may come forward and purchase the same. Petitioners in their reply, though stated that they are ready and willing to purchase the land, but did not make specific mention for actually purchasing the land. Time for purchasing the land/executing the sale deed was also not mentioned in the reply. Under bonafide belief that petitioners were not willing to purchase the land, the respondents sold the land to Smt. Meena Devi vide registered sale deed. On receipt of notices of this contempt petition, respondents took remedial measures and instituted civil suit for cancelling the sale deed executed by them to ensure the order passed in CWP No. 535 of 2018 is complied with in its letter and spirit. The respondents have further submitted that in the aforesaid civil suit, a compromise decree has been passed by the National Lok Adalat on the basis of compromise deed arrived at between the respondents and Smt. Meena Devi. Pursuant to the compromise, sale deed that was inadvertently executed by the replying respondents, has been ordered to be cancelled. It now stands cancelled. - 4 - Learned counsel for the petitioners acknowledge cancellation of sale deed executed by the respondents in faovur of Smt. Meena Devi. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents assured that the order passed by this Court shall be implemented in letter and spirit by the respondents and there shall not be any breach of the undertaking by the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that even though the respondents had breached own undertaking, however, taking note of the remedial measures taken by them, the present contempt proceedings be closed at this stage. 5. Taking note of the remedial measures taken by the respondent for complying the judgment passed on 09.05.2019 in CWP No.535 of 2018, the compromise decree admitted to have been passed in civil suit instituted by the respondents against Smt. Meena Devi, the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, more particularly the assurance given by learned counsel for the respondents, present contempt proceedings are closed. Notices issued to the respondents are discharged. - 5 - Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge July 3, 2025 R.Atal