2025:HHC:34584 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.276 of 2022 Decided on: 13.10.2025 M/s Jai Hind Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. … Petitioner Versus Sh. Ram Lal (deceased) through his legal heirs: Amar Nath and others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ____________________________________________________ _ For the petitioner : Mr. B.N. Misra, Senior Advocate, with Ms. Vandana Misra, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. P.S. Goverdhan, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Rakesh Thakur, Advocate, for respondents No.1 (i) to 1 (iv), 1 (vi) and 1 (vii). Respondents No.1 (v) & 1 (viii) ex parte. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:- “i) That the impugned order dated 24.03.2021 passed by Ld. Sr. Civil Judge, Kasauli, District Solan, H.P. in execution case No.66/1 of 18 (Annexure P-10) may kindly be set aside. ii) That the Ld. Executing Court below may further kindly be directed to frame appropriate issue with respect and to fraud of mis-representation facts by DH/respondents with respect to the actual location and ownership of the debris 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:34584 dumping site being used by the petitioner as well as the actual location of the land belonging respondents. to the DH/ respondents. iii) That the Ld. Court below may further kindly be directed to get the debris dumping site of the JD/petitioner as well as the Khasra Nos. mentioned by the DH/respondents in the plaint demarcated through a competent revenue officials not below the rank of Naib Tehsildar (AC 2nd Grade) and take appropriate action thereon. iv) That the respondents may kindly be saddled with exemplary cost for the present litigation.” 2. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the stand of the parties, as on one hand, the contention of learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner is that the amount deposited by the petitioner has not been released in favour of the respondents, whereas the stand of the respondents on the basis of the statement of account of the respondents is concerned is that the amount already stands released in favour of the respondents, this petition, as agreed, is disposed of with the observation that if till today, the deposited amount has not been released in favour of the respondents, then the same shall not be released and release thereof shall abide by any order that may be passed by the learned Appellate Court where the appeal filed by the 3 2025:HHC:34584 present petitioner alongwith an application for condonation of delay is pending. However, this order shall have no effect in case the amount already stands released in favour of the respondents as of today. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge October 13, 2025 (Rishi)