2025:HHC:29051 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CMPMO No. 85 of 2010 Decided on : 27.08.2025 Smt. Neema Devi. …Petitioner Versus Smt. Savitri Devi. …Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : M/s Chander Narayan Singh and Anshul Gandhi, Advocates. For the respondent : Stated to be expired. M/s Mukul Sood and Rahul Gathania, Advocates. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) When this case was taken up for consideration, the Court stands apprised that Smt. Savitri Devi, against whom orders were passed in the proceedings initiated under Order 39, Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure, has since died. 2. Mr. Mukul Sood, learned counsel, who was earlier representing deceased Smt. Savitri Devi, states that as the impugned act was personal, now the cause stands frustrated with her death. 1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:29051 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as Smt. Savitri Devi had flouted the Court order and had created third party interest in the suit property, it be observed that the closure of these proceedings shall not have any adverse effect on the other proceedings, which are being contested by the parties on merit, which are pending adjudication before this Court in terms of RSA No. 618 of 2007. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that Smt. Savitri Devi is since dead, obviously these proceedings have abated and are closed as such. However, it is observed that closure of these proceedings, obviously shall not have any bearing, as far as adjudication of the RSA on merit is concerned. 5. The petition stands disposed of in above terms. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge August 27, 2025 (Shivank Thakur)