MP 1 AO991_11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 991 OF 2011 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1995 OF 2011 IN L.C. SUIT NO. 1827 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1324 OF 2011 Arvind Kalidas Shah ... Appellant Versus Mumbai Municipal Corporation through its Commissioner and another ... Respondents Mr. Abdul Rab Shaikh, Advocate for the Appellant. Mr. H. J. Dedia, AGP for Respondent No.2. Mrs. K. K. Soran, Advocate for BMC. CORAM : R. M. BORDE, J. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 P. C. : The appellant is raising challenge to the order of refusing the ad- interim relief in favour of the appellant by the Judge, City Civil Court while dealing with the Notice of Motion in Long Cause Suit No. 1827 of 2011. The impugned order is dated 23.08.2011. 2. It is the contention of the appellant that the alleged construction which is a subject matter of the Suit is quite old and it can be regularized in view of the policy decision adopted by the Government in the year 2005. The Counsel appearing for the appellant makes a statement that his client would tender an application before the Corporation Authority for regularization of the construction, as contemplated by Section 53(iii) r/w. Section 44 of the M.R.T.P. and P.U.L.P. Act. If such a proposal is tendered within a period of four weeks from today, the Corporation shall render its decision within a period of six weeks thereafter. In the meantime, the Corporation shall not take any adverse action against the appellant and also for a further period of two weeks if the MP 2 AO991_11 decision taken up by the Executive Engineer is adverse to the interests of the appellant. 3. The Counsel appearing for the appellant, on instructions, seeks to withdraw the Appeal from Order. Leave is granted as prayed for with the directions as referred above. 4. Appeal from Order stands disposed of as withdrawn. All pending Civil Applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (R.M. BORDE, J)