M.C.Shimla Vs Tarlochan Singh deceased through Lrs. Laveleen Kaur

has preferred Regular Second Appeal against the judgment and decree dated 13.12.2007, passed by the learned District Judge (Forest) Shimla, H.P., (hereinafter referred to as First Appellate Court), in Civil Appeal No. 34-S/13 of 2007/05, titled as Municipal Corporation Shimla through its Commissioner versus Trilochan Singh.

¶12

Vide judgment and decree dated 13.12.2007, the appeal filed by the appellant has been dismissed by the learned First Appellate Court, which has been preferred by the 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶13

( 2024:HHC:11302 )

¶14

appellant against the judgment and decree dated 30.04.2005, passed by the Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court No.2, Shimla, H.P., (hereinafter referred to as trial Court), in Civil Suit No.5/1 of 2001, titled as Trilochan Singh versus Municipal Corporation Shimla, through its Commissioner.

¶15

Vide judgment dated 30.04.2005, the learned trial

¶16

Court has partly decreed the suit by granting the following relief’s:-

¶17

“Judged. In the light of my findings returned on issues No.1 to 8, suit of the plaintiff is partly decreed to the effect that defendant is restrained from interfering in the possession and business of the plaintiff in the premises being run over as Ice Cream Parlour by the plaintiff at Ridge level measuring 104 Sq. ft. whatsoever till the plaintiff is handed over the possession of Ice Cream Parlour as agreed in the Padam Dev Complex, Phase-II. Rest of the claim of the plaintiff is dismissed. Suit is decreed with costs. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. File after completion be consigned to the record room.”

¶18

Now by way of application, bearing CMP No.21030

¶19

of 2024, which has jointly been moved by the parties, it has been averred that during the pendency of the present appeal, before this Court, the premises in question were again leased out to the plaintiff Trilochan Singh, on fresh terms and conditions. In this regard, copy of the lease agreement dated

¶20

( 2024:HHC:11302 )

¶21

01.11.2023 (Annexure C-1), has also been annexed with this application.

¶22

In view of the above, by way of the application CMP No.21030 of 2024, a prayer has been made by the present appellant to dispose of the appeal. The application is duly supported by the affidavit of Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Shimla, as well as Navpreet Singh, legal representatives of original plaintiff.

¶23

In view of compromise, which has been annexed with the application, the application CMP No.21030 of 2024, is allowed.

¶24

Consequently, the appeal is disposed of being compromised, by setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court.

¶25

The suit filed by the plaintiff is decreed, being compromised, in terms of the fresh settlement, which has been arrived at between the parties. The parties shall be bound by the terms and conditions of the lease agreement dated 01.11.2023 (Annexure C-1), as well as the terms and conditions of the compromise, which have been enumerated in the application CMP No.21030 of 2024.

¶26