Himachal Pradesh High Court
CMPMO/164/2026 of SUDARSHAN SHARMA Vs LOK RAJ SAINI on 6 August 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 164 of 2026 Date of decision: 06.08.2026. Sudarshan Sharma ...Petitioner. Versus Lok Raj Saini ...Respondent. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Dr. Lalit K.
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.
2026:HHC:33101
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CMPMO No. 164 of 2026
Date of decision: 06.08.2026. Sudarshan Sharma
...Petitioner.
Versus Lok Raj Saini
...Respondent.
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Dr. Lalit K. Sharma, Advocate.
For the respondent : Mr. Suneet Goel, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vivek Negi, Advocate.
Romesh Verma, Judge (Oral):
It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in terms and in sequel to the order as passed by this Court dated 17.04.2026, entire decretal amount along with up-to-date interest stands deposited in the registry of this Court. He further submits that since the amount has been deposited, therefore, on instructions, he has no objection in case the entire decretal amount along with interest is ordered to be released to the respondent. However, the said release be made subject to the final outcome of RSA No. 591 of 2015, pending adjudication before this Court. He further submits
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
that the present petition as well as the execution petition, which has been filed by the respondent can be disposed of with a direction that both the parties shall be governed by the final outcome of the above mentioned RSA. Ordered accordingly.
2. Since, the entire decretal amount has been deposited by the petitioner, therefore, the order of attachment as passed by the learned Executing Court, is ordered to be vacated.
3. Mr. Vivek Negi, learned counsel for the respondent undertakes to furnish the particulars of the bank account within a period of two weeks and in the event of doing so, the entire amount shall be remitted to the same bank account of the respondent.
4. Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of along with pending applications, if any.
(Romesh Verma)
Judge 6th August, 2026. (kck)