1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.907 OF 2010 Rajani Govind Bhatia .. Petitioner. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Anr. .. Respondents. Mr.B.B.Parekh for the petitioner. Mr.Rajesh More APP for the State. Ms.Seema Rawade for the respondent-corporation. CORAM : N.D.DESPHANDE, J. DATED : JANUARY 20, 2011. PC: 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The present writ petition is filed to challenge the proceedings initiated by the respondent-corporation under section 328-A and 471 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act pending on the file of 42nd Court, Dadar, Shinde-Wadi. The complaint is filed for not having license to display Neon Sign board. According to the petitioner, no such license is required for display of Neon Sign boards. The complainant appeared before the said court pursuant to the summons given to the petitioner. The petitioner also challenged the proceedings before the Sessions Court in revision under section 397. The S 1 said revision was dismissed by the order dated 18.7.2009. It was observed that the impugned order of the learned Magistrate does not suffer from any patent illegality and propriety. It must be mentioned here that certain aspects are going to the root of the facts and some legal provisions and the questions of facts cannot be decided in the writ petition. It is the case of the petitioner that she was denied any right to defend the complaint/case. There is no breach of any principle of natural justice. She had also appeared before revisional jurisdiction where she failed. No case for interference is made out. The petition is summarily dismissed. 3. All defences and contentions are available to the petitioner at every stage of the proceedings under the Mumbai Municipal Act and learned trial Court shall decide the proceedings in accordance with the law. The petition is disposed of. (N.D.Deshpande, J.)