1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Civil Revision No.78 of 2023 Decided on: 30.04.2025 Raj Thakur ….Petitioner Versus Gagan Dogra & Others ….Respondents ________________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. G.C. Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Meera Devi, Advocate. Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. De-linked from Civil Revision No.93 of 2024. 2. This petition has been preferred by the petitioner against judgment dated 24.03.2023, passed by the Appellate Authority, Shimla, in Rent Appeal No.33-S/14 of 2022, titled as Raj Thakur vs. Gagan Dogra & Others, whereby, order of eviction dated 31.08.2022, passed by learned Rent Controller- II, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., in Rent Petition No.214/2 of 2019, titled as Ganga Dogra & Others vs. Smt. Raj Thakur, has been affirmed. 2 3. In sequel to orders dated 04.04.2025 and 24.04.2025, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record communication received from petitioner Raj Thakur through email, whereby, she has communicated that she is ready and willing to abide by the conditions imposed by the Court, contained in order dated 04.04.2025, and accordingly, she has undertaken to vacate the premises by 31.12.2025 with continuous payment of use and occupation charges at the rate of Rs.5,000/- per month till the premises are vacated. 4. It has also been communicated that legal heirs of the petitioner will also have no right whatsoever over the premises in question and she has authorized her counsel to make statement. To this effect, separate statement of learned counsel for the petitioner has also been recorded without oath. 5. Matter has been amicably settled between the parties. In this regard, communication dated 30.04.2025 received from the petitioner has also been placed on record by learned counsel for the petitioner and the statement, as instructed by the petitioner has also been made by her counsel. Relevant contents of the communication dated 30.04.2025, are as under: 3 “That a rent revision Titled as Raj Thakur versus Gagan Dogra is pending application before this honourable court. That the applicant is ready and willing to abide by the conditions imposed by this honourable court, vide order dated 4th April, 2025. That the applicant will continue to pay the use and occupation charges at the rate of Rs.5000/- per month till the premises are vacated. That the applicant undertakes to vacate the premises by 31 December 2025. The applicant undertakes that the legal heirs of the applicant will have no right whatsoever over the premises in question. That the counsel of the applicant is authorised to make a statement to this effect. Thanks Raj Thakur” 6. Statement of Mr. Vivek Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, recorded to this effect, is as under: “I have filed power of attorney on behalf of Smt. Raj Thakur, petitioner, and I have been duly authorized to make statement on her behalf. I have received written instructions through email received by Mr. Varun Chauhan, Advocate, from petitioner Smt. Raj Thakur, to undertake vacation of premises by 31.12.2025 with further undertaking for continuous payment of use and occupation charges at the rate of Rs.5,000/- per month till the premises are vacated 4 and further that legal heirs of the petitioner shall have no right whatsoever over the premises in reference. Failure in complying with the undertaking given by the petitioner, petitioner shall be liable to face contempt proceedings also apart from the civil and criminal liability. My aforesaid statement is in consonance with the instructions imparted to me by the petitioner and nothing has been added or deleted by me in these instructions.” 7. In view of above, present petition is disposed of in terms of aforesaid compromise with direction to the petitioner to vacate the premises on or before 31.12.2025 and to continuously pay use and occupation charges till the vacation of the premises, with the observation that for failure in complying with the undertaking, petitioner shall also be liable to face contempt proceedings apart from civil and criminal liability. 8. Petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Vivek Singh Thakur) April 30, 2025 Judge (Yashwant)