2025:HHC:19229 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.648/2023 Date of Decision: 21st June, 2025. Rup Lal .....Petitioner Versus Mast Ram & Anr. …..Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. K.D. Sood, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Ajay Chandel, Advocate. Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral). By way of the present petition, a challenge has been laid to the impugned order dated 07.08.2023, passed by the Civil Judge Court No.2, Sarkaghat, District Mandi, HP, whereby the Executing Court had dismissed the execution petition, filed by the petitioner/decree holder, as having been satisfied. 2. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings and impugned order. 3. The decree, in the case at hand, sought to be executed, is being reproduced hereinbelow for ready reference:- 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? YES 2 2025:HHC:19229 Regular Second Appeal No.117 of 2006 DECREE This appeal coming on for hearing on 5th Day of December, 2017 before a Single Bench of Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge, High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla in the presence of Mr. K.D. Sood, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rajneesh Lal, Advocate for the appellant and Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Advocate for the respondents; it is ordered that for the reasons given in the judgment dated 05.12.2017, the instant appeal is allowed and the impugned judgments and decrees rendered by both the learned Courts below are set aside. Consequently, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed and the plaintiff/appellant herein is held entitled for vacant possession of the suit land shown as Khasra No.576/313/1 in Ex.PW2/A, by way of demolition of the danga raised thereon. No order as to costs. Given under my hand and seal of the Court, this 5th day of December, 2017. Section Officer (Judicial) Deputy Registrar (Judicial) High Court of Himachal Pradesh Shimla-171001 4. Vide order dated 27.03.2025, passed by this Court, the Tehsildar, District Mandi, had been directed to conduct a demarcation of the spot in order to see, as to whether a danga existed on Khasra No.576/313/1. In this respect, tatima i.e. Ex.PW2/A, had also been supplied to the Tehsildar Sarkaghat, for doing the needful. 5. In pursuance to the aforesaid order, the Tehsildar concerned, has conducted demarcation. From a perusal of the demarcation report of the 3 2025:HHC:19229 revenue official and the statements recorded, it is evident that there exists no danga on Khasra No.576/313/1, as the same has been demolished and completely removed. 6. Vacant possession of the same has also been handed over to the decree holder. In view thereof, I see no infirmity in the impugned order dated 07.08.2023, calling for any interference in the same. However, the revenue authorities are directed to make appropriate requisite corrections in the revenue record. 7. Accordingly, present petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Bipin Chander Negi) Judge 21st June, 2025 (Gaurav Rawat)