IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C.R. No. 158 of 2005. Decided on: 11 th November, 2010. B.M. Kapila. ….Petitioner. -Versus- Dr. Ashok Kumar Sood. .…Respondent. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mr. Karan Singh Kanwar, Advocate. For the respondent. : Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral) : With the consent of parties, the civil revision petition is disposed of on the following terms: “Though the orders passed by both the authorities are upheld/sustained, however, it is directed that only on the plans being sanctioned by the competent authority, the order of eviction shall be available for execution. The sanctioned or approved plans shall be produced before the executing Court whereupon the execution Court shall allow a reasonable time to the tenant for vacating the property and delivering possession to the landlord. Till then, the tenant shall remain liable to pay charges for use and occupation of the premises at the same rate at which they are being paid earlier. Subject to these modifications, the orders passed by both the authorities below are maintained.” 2. It is made clear that the petitioner/tenant shall keep on paying the use and occupation charges to the landlord on every 7th day of the month. The landlord shall supply the Saving Bank Account to the 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? petitioner/tenant to remit the amount, within a period of one week from today. 3. In view of the aforesaid observations/directions, the petition stands disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge November 11, 2010. (bhupender)