2026:HHC:26000 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CR No.103 of 2025 & CMP No.15466 of 2026 Decided on: 01.07 .2026 ____________________________________________________________ Mahant Ram Chadha (now deceased) through his legal representatives ...Petitioners Versus Suresh Kumar Sharma ...Respondent _____________________________________________________________ Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the petitioners: Mr. Mohinder Verma, Advocate, vice, Mr. Bhagwati Chander Verma, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Naresh Sharma and Mr. Aishwaraya Chauhan, Advocates. Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge (Oral) By way of present petition, the petitioners have laid challenge to the order dated 14.05.2025, passed by the Appellate Authority, Shimla, District Shimla, HP, in Rent Appeal No.28-S/14 of 2024, titled, Sh. Mahant Ram Chaddha (now deceased) through his Legal representatives vs. Suresh Kumar Sharma, whereby their appeal was dismissed and the order dated 08.08.2024, 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:26000 passed by Rent Controller, Court No.(II), Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, in Rent Petition No.123-02 of 2017/14, titled, Sh. Suresh Kumar Sharma vs. Sh. Mahant Ram Chaddha, has been affirmed. 2. The respondent-landlord had filed a petition under Section 14 of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1987, against the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners on the grounds of non payment of arrears of rent and further the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners has built/acquired another residence, reasonably sufficient for his requirement in Straw Berry Hills Chotta Shimla. The Rent Controller had passed an order holding that the demised premises is bonafidely required by the respondent- landlord for the purpose of rebuilding and reconstruction and therefore, the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners is liable to be evicted from the demised premises. The predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners was directed to handover possession of the demised premises to the respondent-landlord within 30 days of the intimation of sanction of plan of the respondent-landlord for rebuilding and reconstruction of demised premises by the competent authority. However, the predecessor-in-interest, being a 3 2026:HHC:26000 tenant was held entitled for the benefits of proviso (c) of Section 14(3) of the H.P. Urban Rent Control Act and to the right of re-entry in the rebuilt and reconstructed building to the extent of the area in which he is in occupation. 3. During the pendency of the revision petition before this Court, the parties have settled the dispute among themselves and filed an application for modifying the order of eviction passed by the Rent Controller. As per the compromise entered inter-se the parties, the petitioners have agreed to vacate the accommodation in their occupation by 31.05.2027 and till then the respondent- landlord will not execute the eviction order. The petitioners being the legal representatives of late Sh. Mahant Ram Chadha have agreed to pay use and occupation charges amicably settled between the parties for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- till the period ending 30.04.2026, which amount has been accepted by the respondent-landlord. Thereafter, the petitioners have agreed to pay use and occupation charges with respect to the accommodation in question for the period commencing from 01.05.2026 at the rate of ₹15,000/- per month regularly till 31.05.2027. The amount of rent shall be paid by the petitioners to the 4 2026:HHC:26000 respondent-landlord on or before 10th of each month, regularly. They have further undertaken not to commit any default in payment of use and occupation charges at the rate of ₹15,000/- per month till 31.05.2027. Further as per the compromise arrived at inter-se the parties, the petitioners have foregone their right of re-entry in the premises and thus they will not claim the said right in terms of the order passed by the Rent Controller. 4. Since the parties have settled the matter in terms of the aforementioned facts and have placed on record their affidavits, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the present petition and the same deserves to be disposed of in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties as stipulated in the application bearing CMP No.15466 of 2026, which shall form part of the order. 5. Consequently, the present revision petition is disposed of in terms of the contents in CMP No.15466 of 2026 and affidavits annexed therewith, which shall form part of the order and the order passed by the Rent Controller shall not be executed by the respondent-landlord on or before 31.05.2027. In case the parties to the compromise do not abide by the terms and conditions of the 5 2026:HHC:26000 compromise arrived at inter-se them as reduced in CMP No.15466 of 2026, they shall be liable for disobedience of the undertaking as well as for initiation of contempt proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act. 6. Keeping in view the above, CMP No.15466 of 2026, also stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 01 st July, 2026 ( Jiya Lal Bhardwaj ) (Anurag) Judge