1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 885 OF 2007 APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 885 OF 2007 APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 885 OF 2007 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1234 OF 2007 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 72 OF 2008 Smt. Sushila Suryakant Savardekar through her C.A.Mihirkumar Bijaykumar Jha ..Appellant (Org.Plaintiff) Versus Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. Respondent (Org.defendant) Mr. M.H.Holmagi, Advocate, a/w Mr. Rajendra Narvankar, for the appellant. Mrs.Geeta Joglekar, Advocate, for the respondent. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 21st January, 2008. DATE : 21st January, 2008. DATE : 21st January, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. 2 1. Heard learned Counsel for both the sides. 2. The present Appeal was filed by the plaintiff-appellant because the trial Court refused ad-interim relief against the notice issued under Section 351 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act. The Notice of Motion is still pending and the Municipal Corporation has not filed reply. The disputed structure is on the top of the existing structure 3. In view of this, with consent of the parties, the Appeal stands disposed of with the following directions :- (i) The Respondent-Municipal Corporation shall file reply to the Notice of Motion within two weeks from this date and if the plaintiff, if she so desires, shall file rejoinder within one week thereafter and within three weeks thereafter the trial Court shall hear and dispose of the Notice of Motion (ii) The parties shall maintain status quo till then. 3 (iii) In view of the disposal of the Appeal, the Civil Applications Nos.1234 of 2007 and No.72 of 2008 do not survive and stand disposed of accordingly. (J.H.BHATIA,J.) (J.H.BHATIA,J.) (J.H.BHATIA,J.)