JUDGMENT : Virender Singh, J. The above titled Civil Revisions are being disposed of by a common judgment, as both these petitions have been filed by the petitioners, under Section 24(5) of the H.P. Urban Rent Control Act, 1987, against the judgment dated 29.2.2024 2. Vide judgment dated 29.2.2024, the learned Appellate Authority (II), Shimla, District Shimla has decided Rent Appeal No. 23-S/13(b) of 2023, titled as, ‘Shashi Chauhan (deceased) through LRs vs. Balbir Parihar’ and Rent Appeal No. 7-S/13(b) of 2023, titled as, ‘Balbir Parihar vs. Shashi Chauhan (deceased) through LRs, preferred by the parties to the present Civil Revisions. 3. The aforesaid appeals have been preferred against the order dated 27.3.2023, passed by the Court of learned Rent Controller (II), Shimla, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rent Controller’), while deciding Rent Petition No. 120-2 of 2015/13, titled as, ‘Shashi Chauhan (deceased) through LRs vs. Balbir Parihar’, filed by the petitioners, in Civil Revision No. 56 of 2024. 4. Parties to the present lis are referred to, in the same manner, in which, they were referred to by the learned Rent Controller. 5. The petitioners/landlords have filed the petition under Section 14 of the Act, against tenant Balbir Parihar, regarding shop No. 6, situated at 4 th Floor of the building, known as ‘Om Niwas’, Cemetery Road, Sanjauli (hereinafter referred to as ‘the tenanted premises’). The said petition was partly allowed by the learned Rent Controller, by passing the following order: “In view of my findings on the issues above, the petition for the petitioner partly succeeds and the same is hereby allowed. The petitioner is held entitled for the eviction of the respondent on the ground of personal bonafide requirement and carrying out material additions and alteration without the consent of petitioner from the tenanted premises i.e. Shop No. 6 situated in the 4th floor of the building known as ‘Om Niwas’ Cemetery Road, Sanjauli. Further, petitioner is also entitled for the eviction of respondent from the tenanted premises on the ground of arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 1,96,982/-. However, if respondent pays or deposits aforesaid amount of Rs. 1,96,982/- within 30 days from the date of this order alongwith costs, then said ground of eviction will not be available to the petitioner. However, eviction on the ground of change of user of tenanted premises and nuisance are hereby rejected. Memo of costs be prepared accordingly. 1,96,982/-. However, if respondent pays or deposits aforesaid amount of Rs. 1,96,982/- within 30 days from the date of this order alongwith costs, then said ground of eviction will not be available to the petitioner. However, eviction on the ground of change of user of tenanted premises and nuisance are hereby rejected. Memo of costs be prepared accordingly. The file, after its due completion be consigned to record Room.” 6. Against the said order, appeals were preferred by the landlords, as well as, tenant, which were dismissed by the learned Appellate Authority, vide judgment dated 29.2.2024. The landlords have filed Civil Revision No. 56 of 2024, whereas, tenant has filed Civil Revision No. 115 of 2024. 7. During pendency of the present Civil Revisions, the matter was referred to mediation for settlement. As per the stand taken by the parties, as well as, as per the report of the learned Mediator, the matter has been settled between the parties. 8. Today, one of the LRs of landlord, namely, Rajinder Chauhan and tenant Balbir Parihar are present, before this Court. Joint statement of Rajinder Chauhan and Mr. Y.P. Sood, Advocate (on behalf of Shakun Chauhan and Nipun Chauhan) has been recorded. They have deposed, on oath, that the matter has now been settled between them and the tenant Balbir Parihar. As per their statement, tenant Balbir Parihar has paid a sum of Rs. 1,70,000/- to the landlord through Mr. Y.P. Sood, Advocate, towards arrears of rent and use and occupation charges. According to them, nothing is now due against tenant Balbir Parihar. 9. They have further deposed that the possession of the tenanted premises was handed over by Balbir Parihar, on 31.12.2024. They have further deposed that in view of the settlement, they will withdraw the execution petition, filed by them, for execution of the eviction order, passed by the learned Rent Controller, in Rent Petition No. 120-2 of 2015/13, as well as, the suit for recovery, bearing Civil Suit No. 40 of 2023, pending adjudication before the learned Civil Judge, Court No. 5, Shimla, within a period of one month. The aforesaid Civil Suit is stated to be filed for recovery of arrears of rent. 10. According to their further deposition, in view of the settlement, arrears of rent, amounting to Rs. The aforesaid Civil Suit is stated to be filed for recovery of arrears of rent. 10. According to their further deposition, in view of the settlement, arrears of rent, amounting to Rs. 1,96,982/-, deposited by tenant Balbir Parihar, in the Court of learned Rent Controller, may be ordered to be released in their favour and the Court fee, paid on the suit for recovery, may be refunded back, as per the Rules. 10. Lastly, they have deposed that in view of the settlement, they do not want to press Civil Revision No. 56 of 2024, and the same may kindly be dismissed as compromised. 11. Tenant Balbir Parihar has also deposed on the similar lines by deposing that the matter has now been settled between him and the landlords. He has deposed that in pursuance of the settlement, he has paid a sum of Rs. 1,70,000/-, to the landlords, through Mr. Y.P. Sood, Advocate, as arrears of rent and towards use and occupation charges to the landlord, and handed over the possession of the tenanted premises, to the landlord, on 31.12.2024. 12. He has further deposed that he has no objection, in case, the amount of arrears of rent, amounting to Rs. 1, 96,982/-, deposited by him, before the learned Rent Controller, is released in favour of the landlords. 13. Lastly, he has deposed that in view of the settlement, he does not want to press Civil Revision No. 115 of 2024 and that the matter be disposed of, being compromised. 14. Heard. 15. The matter has now been settled between the parties and in view of their settlement, possession of the tenanted premises, has already been handed over to the landlords by the tenant, on 31.12.2024. Not only this, tenant Balbir Parihar has also paid a sum of Rs. 1,70,000/- to the landlords, towards arrears of rent and use and occupation charges. The landlords have specifically deposed that nothing is now due against tenant Balbir Parihar. 16. In addition to this, it has also been deposed by tenant Balbir Parihar that he has no objection in case, the amount of Rs. 1,96,982/-, deposited by him, in the Court of learned Rent Controller, be released in favour of the landlords. 17. On the other hand, reiterating the factum of the compromise, the landlords have given the solemn undertaking to withdraw the execution petition, as well as, the suit for recovery. 1,96,982/-, deposited by him, in the Court of learned Rent Controller, be released in favour of the landlords. 17. On the other hand, reiterating the factum of the compromise, the landlords have given the solemn undertaking to withdraw the execution petition, as well as, the suit for recovery. 18. In view of the settlement, between the parties, both the Civil Revision Petitions are ordered to be dismissed, as compromised. However, the landlords are at liberty to withdraw the amount of Rs. 1,96,982/-, deposited by the tenant, in the Court of learned Rent Controller. The landlords will also withdraw the execution petition, as well as, the Civil Suit for recovery, pending adjudication before the Court of learned Civil Judge, Court No. 5, Shimla, within one month. Hence, the landlords are entitled for the refund of the Court fee paid on the Civil Suit, as per the Rules. 19. The pending application(s), if any, are also disposed of.