SUDARSHAN DEVI AND ORS(Not Applicable) vs DC SHIMLA AND ORS(Not Applicable) — LPA/830/2025

Case under Delhi High Court Act, 1966 Section C10. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 04th May 2026.

CNR: HPHC010695042025

CASE DISPOSED

Filing Number

LPA/58794/2025

Filing Date

12-11-2025

Registration No

LPA/830/2025

Registration Date

04-12-2025

Judge

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHARMA , HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN CHANDER NEGI

Coram

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHARMA , HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN CHANDER NEGI

Bench Type

Single

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Decision Date

04th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Acts & Sections

Delhi High Court Act, 1966 Section C10

Petitioner(s)

SUDARSHAN DEVI AND ORS(Not Applicable)

Adv. Surinder Kumar Saklani

VASUNDRA(Not Applicable)

RICHA(Not Applicable)

PANKAJ KUMAR(Not Applicable)

Respondent(s)

DC SHIMLA AND ORS(Not Applicable)

Adv. ,Janesh Gupta 1123

sun divisional collector(Not Applicable)

THE KHADEEN COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURE SERVICE TAKSAL MOJA DANGIYAR(Not Applicable)

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHARMA , HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN CHANDER NEGI

08-01-2026

NOTICE BEFORE ADMISSION

04-05-2026

ADMISSION AFTER NOTICE

12-03-2026

ADMISSION AFTER NOTICE

27-02-2026

NOTICE BEFORE ADMISSION

Orders

04-05-2026
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN CHANDER NEGI

The High Court of Himachal Pradesh disposed of the appeal on 04.05.2026, accepting the appellants' undertaking to vacate the rented premises by 31.03.2027. The court ordered the ₹78,000 deposit (covering arrears and future rent) to be released to respondent No.3, with a warning that failure to vacate would result in penal consequences and contempt of court proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Himachal Pradesh disposed of the appeal on 04.05.2026, accepting the appellants' undertaking to vacate the rented premises by 31.03.2027. The court ordered the ₹78,000 deposit (covering arrears and future rent) to be released to respondent No.3, with a warning that failure to vacate would result in penal consequences and contempt of court proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

Explore other courts

Search Another Case