IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1980 of 2009 (M/S) Vinod Kumar, S/o Sri Raghuveer Singh, R/o Nai Basti Guru Road, Dehradun. …Petitioner. Versus 1. Laxmi Kant. 2. Rama Kant. Both S/o Daya Shankar R/o 31, Nai Basti, Guru Road, Dehradun. …..Respondents. Mr. Siddhartha Sah, learned counsel for the petitioner. None for the respondents. Date:- November 24, 2009 Hon’ble B.S. Verma J. Heard Mr. Siddhartha Sah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the earlier writ was filed to assail the order dated 24-10-1998 and 14-9- 2005 passed by the SCC/ Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Dehradun and SCC/ Additional District Judge/ FTC 5th Dehradun by filing the writ petition No. 1429 of 2005 (M/S), Vinod Kumar Vs. Additional District Judge, Dehradun. An interim order was passed on 06-12- 2005 by this Court that the petitioner shall not be evicted from the accommodation in dispute till the next date of listing, provided he deposits the entire rent plus water and electricity charges alongwith the house tax of the disputed premises right from 01-03-1993 till date, within a period of four weeks from today. While depositing the said rent and other charges, the sum of Rs. 3,000/- already deposited by the petitioner shall be adjusted. In case of any failure in depositing the said amount within the period prescribed by this Court, the stay order stand vacated automatically. By means of the present writ petition, the order dated 13- 11-2009 passed by the 3rd Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) 2 Dehradun. In execution proceeding, warrant of eviction was directed to be issued against the petitioner. On account of default, the final decreetal amount has not been deposited within time. This is the 2nd writ petition for same cause of action. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to make application/amendment in writ petition No. 1429 of 2005 (M/S), Vinod Kumar Vs. Additional District Judge, Dehradun, which is pending before this Court for hearing. Permission is granted to the learned counsel for the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to make application/amendment in writ petition No. 1429 of 2005 (M/S), Vinod Kumar Vs. Additional District Judge, Dehradun. (B.S. Verma, J.) 24.11.2009 MK