2026:HHC:25412 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 708 of 2025 Date of decision : 29.06.2026. Udit Kumar & another ...Petitioners. Versus Gajinder singh Bisht ...Respondent. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : Mr. B.S. Chauhan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sahil Sharma, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Narender Sharma, Advocate. Romesh Verma, Judge (Oral): After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the petitioners have almost completed the construction over the suit land. He further submits that the suit has been instituted by the respondent for the grant of mandatory injunction, which shall be proved by the respondent by placing on record documentary evidence in conjunction with the oral evidence and the said proof shall be subject to the final outcome of the main civil suit, which is still pending before the learned trial Court. 2. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that for the time being Annexure P-8 order under challenge before this 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? -2- Court can be quashed and set aside and the parties can be relegated to the learned trial Court for adjudication of the main suit and to take the same to its logical end. 3. In view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the respondent, on instructions, Annexure P-8 order is quashed and set aside with liberty to the respondent to avail appropriate remedy in accordance with law for the redressal of his grievance. 4. Accordingly, the present petition stands allowed with liberty to the respondent as aforesaid. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Romesh Verma) Judge 29th June, 2026. (kck)