: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.994 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1248 OF 2009 Deepak Dattaram Akre .. Appellant V/s. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay .. Respondents ALONGWITH APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.995 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1249 OF 2009 Manoj Dattaram Akre .. Appellant V/s. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay .. Respondents AND APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.996 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1250 OF 2009 Sanjay Dattaram Akre .. Appellant V/s. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay .. Respondents Mr. Kunal Bhange for the Appellant. Mr. A.C. Singh for the Respondents. CORAM : SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED : 10 TH MARCH, 2010. P.C.: 1. The Appeals from Orders have been filed by three brothers who contend that the City Civil : 2 : Court at Dindoshi, Goregaon, Bombay, has erred in refusing them interim relief by dismissing their Notice of Motion No.962 of 2008 in L.C. Suit No.940 of 2008. According to them, their structures have been in existence for long and, therefore, they cannot be evicted without following due process of law. 2. The trial Court has dismissed the Notice of Motion on the ground that the appellants had not disclosed the fact that their mother was allotted two flats in lieu of the structure that she was occupying. The trial Court has accepted the fact that the respondent-Municipal Corporation had demolished the structures which were occupied by their mother, after she was allotted two flats. The trial Court has also accepted the contention of the respondent-Municipal Corporation that the appellants had reconstructed the structures behind the earlier site and were dishonestly seeking alternate premises in accordance with the policy of the respondent-Municipal Corporation. : 3 : 3. Admittedly, the structures are still in existence. No notice has been issued for demolition of these structures. Even assuming the structures have been reconstructed illegally, it is now well settled that it would be necessary for the respondent-Municipal Corporation to issue a notice. A learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Abdul Hasan Shaikh Mansuri vs. Municipal Corporation of Mumbai & Ors., reported in 2007 (4) ALL MR 97, has held that no authority can be permitted to take unilateral action even if the structure is unauthorized, except by following due process of law. 4. Mr. Singh, the learned Advocate for the respondent-Municipal Corporation, on instructions from Mr. Rohit V. Rajas, Junior Engineer (Maintenance), K/W Ward of the respondent-Municipal Corporation, states that the suit structures will not be demolished without following due process of law. This statement is accepted. : 4 : 5. In view of this, no further orders are required. The Appeals from Orders are dismissed. 6. The learned Advocate for the appellants states that in view of the statement made on behalf of the respondent-Municipal Corporation, the appellants will withdraw the Suit pending before the trial Court. 7. In view of the above, the Civil Applications pending in these Appeals from Orders do not survive and the same are dismissed as infructuous.