2025:HHC:25451 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CMPMO No. 241 of 2018 Decided on : 31.07.2025 Shri Raj Kumar. …Petitioner Versus Smt. Naimita Walia and another. …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Bhupender Gupta, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Janesh Gupta, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Dushyant Dadwal, Advocate. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following relief:- “(i) Impugned order dated 26.08.2016 Annexure P-5 and Order dated 03.05.2018 Annexure P-7 may be ordered to be quashed and set aside and consequently an ad interim injunction may be granted in favour of the plaintiff- petitioner restraining the defendants No.1 and 2 respondents from changing the nature and user of the land bearing Khata No.47 Khatauni No.75 to 77, plot No.3 area measuring 1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:25451 1450-72 sq. mtrs. to the extent of 27600/145072 shares measuring 276-00 Sq. mtrs. situated at Mohal Civil Station, Mauja and Tehsil Dharamshala, District Kangra (HP) till disposal of the suit.” 2. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to the orders impugned and submitted that the orders passed by the learned Trial Court as well as the learned Appellate Court are perverse, in the light of the fact that the contention of the plaintiff/petitioner has not at all been taken into consideration while rejecting the application. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that there is no infirmity in the orders impugned because they are reasoned orders and as the learned Courts below rightly came to the conclusion that no case was made out for the plaintiff for the grant of plaintiff, accordingly, this petition be rejected. 4. Be that as it may, a perusal of the record demonstrates that a Civil Suit was filed in the year 2013. Thereafter, post filing of the present petition in this Court, in terms of order dated 25.10.2018, this Court requisitioned the record of the Civil Suit. This means that the proceedings in the 3 2025:HHC:25451 main Suit are stand still since the month of October, 2018. 5. In these circumstances, taking into consideration the fact that the Civil Suit is now more than 12 years old and for the last 7 years, the matter could not proceed because the record stands requisitioned by this Court, this petition is disposed of with the direction that let an endeavour be made by the learned Civil Court to decide the Civil Suit as expeditiously as possible and preferably before 31.03.2026. Till the decision of the Civil Suit, the parties shall maintain status quo qua the suit land as it exists today. Registry is directed to forthwith send back the original record to the learned Trial Court. Parties are directed to appear before the learned Trial Court through counsel on 18.08.2025. Registry to ensure that the record is dispatched so that it is received by the learned Trial Court before the said date. 6. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge July 31, 2025 (Shivank Thakur)