Himachal Pradesh High Court
RSA/217/2015 of RAMESH KUMAR SOOD Vs SATYA DEVI on 28 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA RSA No.216 and 217 of 2015 Date of decision: 28.09.2026 1.RSA No.216 of 2015 Ramesh Kumar Sood ...Appellant. Versus Satya Devi (deceased) through her LR ...Respondent. 2.RSA No.217 of 2015 Ramesh Kumar Sood ...Appellant. Versus Satya Devi (deceased) through
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RSA No.216 and 217 of 2015
Date of decision: 28.09.2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. RSA No.216 of 2015
Ramesh Kumar Sood
...Appellant.
Versus
Satya Devi (deceased) through her LR
...Respondent.
2. RSA No.217 of 2015
Ramesh Kumar Sood
...Appellant.
Versus
Satya Devi (deceased) through her LR
...Respondent
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the appellant : Mr. Y.P. Sood, Advocate.
For the respondent : Mr. Varun Chauhan, Advocate.
Romesh Verma, Judge (Oral):
RSA No.217 of 2015
It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the matter stands compromised inter se the parties. It has been submitted that the appellant has handed over possession to the Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
respondent, and that fact has been duly acknowledged by learned counsel for the respondent. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the amount of use and occupation charges which stands deposited in the Registry of this Court and before the courts below, as per the terms and conditions, has to be disbursed to the present appellant. The said fact is not denied or disputed by learned counsel for the respondent.
2. Therefore, in view of the settlement which has taken place inter se the parties, the present appeal is disposed of with a direction to the Registry to release or refund the entire amount towards use and occupation charges lying deposited in the Registry of this Court and the learned court below in favour of the appellant-applicant by remitting the same into his savings bank account, the details of which shall be furnished by learned counsel for the appellant within one week.
3. Further, it has been contended that since, during the pendency of the appeal, the parties have negotiated and settled the matter finally, the appropriate court fee permissible under the rules shall be refunded to the appellant. Subject to the provisions of the rules framed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh and admissibility under the rules, the court fee is ordered to be refunded in favour of the appellant.
4. Consequently, the appeal stands disposed of as having been compromised. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
RSA No.216 of 2015
5. In view of the order passed in RSA No. 217 of 2015, this appeal also stands disposed of along with pending application(s), if any.
(Romesh Verma)
Judge 28th September, 2026.
(vt)