IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Civil Revision No.35 of 2017 Decided on: 31.03.2026 Chandan Mehta H….Petitioner Versus Hari Ram ...Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Ve rma, Judge Whether approved for reportting?

For the petitioner: Mr. Mukul Sood, Advocate.

For the respondent: Mr. Bhupinder Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ajeet Pal Singh Jaswal, Advocate.

Romesh Verma, Judge( ora l The present petition arises out of judgment as gpassed by learned Appellate Authority, Solan, District Solan, H.P.

idated 03.12.2016, whereby the appeal filed by the present respondent Hari Ram, was accepted and the order as passed by learned Rent Controller-II, Solan, dated 19.08.2015 was modified and the fair rent of the disputed premises was fixed at Rs.2,500/-

per month instead of Rs.6,000/- per month.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the present petitioner, namely, Shri Chandan Mehta filed an application under Section 4 of the H.P. Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 for fixation of fair rent before the learned Rent Controller on 21.04.2009. It was averred in the petition that the respondent is liable to pay rent of the shop in question at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per month, as the ren