Himachal Pradesh High Court
RSA/94/2026 of CHAND THAKUR Vs VINOD KUMAR MEHTA AND ANOTHER on 15 July 2026
COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA RSA No. 94 of 2026 Date of decision: 15.07.2026 Smt. Chand Thakur ...Appellant. Versus Vinod Kumar Mehta & another ...Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the appellant : Mr. Neeraj
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA RSA No. 94 of 2026 Date of decision: 15.07.2026 Smt. Chand Thakur
...Appellant. Versus Vinod Kumar Mehta & another ...Respondents.
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the appellant : Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ajeet Pal Singh, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. V.S.Chauhan, Senior Advocate with Ms. Priti Steta, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Romesh Verma, Judge (Oral): The present appeal arises out of the judgment and decree as passed by the learned Additional District Judge (1) Shimla dated 28th of March 2026, whereby the appeal filed by the present appellant/objector came to be dismissed, and the findings as returned by the learned Rent Controller Shimla dated 18th of July, 2024, whereby the objection petition filed by the present appellant under the provisions of Order 21 Rule 97 to 101 read with Section 151 of CPC was dismissed.
2. The matter was listed before this Court on 9th of July 2026, and on the said date, the learned counsel for the parties had apprised this Court that an endeavour has been made to settle the matter inter se the parties.
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
3. The learned Senior Counsel (s) for the parties have placed on record a joint application filed under the provisions of Order 23 Rule 3 read with Section 151 of CPC for recording of the compromise. It contains the details and the terms and conditions on which the parties have agreed to settle their dispute inter se them. The registry is directed to register the said CMP. The joint application is exhibited as Ext. C-1, along with the affidavits, and it shall form part of the decree.
4. The joint application is duly supported by the affidavits of the present appellant, Smt. Chand Thakur and respondent-Mr. Vinod Kumar Mehta. They have recorded their statements, separately.
5. Consequently, in view of the terms and conditions which have been entered between the parties, the present appeal is disposed of as having been compromised between them in terms of the joint application.
6. The registry is directed to frame the decree, and the application shall be made part of the same.
Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Romesh Verma) Judge July 15, 2026. (Nisha)