-: 1 :- A.O. 536/11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 536 OF 2011 Sangram Ramdaur Yadav & Anr. ...Appellants. Versus The Municipal Corp. of Greater Mumbai. ..Respondent Mr. N. B. Shukla for the appellants. Mr. J. J. Xavier for the Corporation. Coram : RANJIT MORE, J. Date : July 8, 2011. P. C. : 1. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. By filing this appeal, the appellants challenge the legality and validity of the order dated 14/5/2011 passed by the City Civil Court, Bombay in Notice of Motion No. 1231 of 2011 in L. C. Suit No. 1035 of 2011. By the said order, ad-interim relief of injunction was refused and notice of motion was directed to be registered and made returnable on 9/6/2011. The said suit is filed by the appellants challenging the notice issued by the respondent under section 354 of the M.M.C. Act, 1888. 2. In the present appeal, on 20/5/2011 after hearing both sides this Court directed the parties to maintain status quo. The appellant mainly relies upon Census Certificate of srp -: 2 :- A.O. 536/11 12/5/1978 in favour of his predecessor-in-title Tamboskar Shankar Vitthal and affidavit by said Tamboskar under which the premises were allegedly transferred in his favour. The appellant has also relied upon Shop Act licnece dated 7/9/1985 given by the competent authority to the respondent to run the Kirana Shop. 3. In above facts and circumstances and especially in view of the fact that the notice of motion is made returnable on 9th June 2011, I am not inclined to entertain this appeal. I am of the view that substantial justice will be sub-served by directing the City Civil Court to dispose of the appellant’s notice of motion mentioned above, expeditiously. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent-BMC makes a statement that respondent no.1 shall file its say to the appellant’s notice of motion within the period of six weeks from today with advance copy to the appellant. 5. In the light of above, appeal is dismissed. However, City Civil Court, Bombay is directed to dispose of the aforesaid notice of motion of the appellant as expeditiously as possible and preferably within the period of three months from the date of filing of Say by the respondent. -: 3 :- A.O. 536/11 6. During the pendency and till the final disposal of the aforesaid notice of motion of the appellants, the interim relief of status quo granted by this Court on 20/5/2011 shall remain in force. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion the merits of the case. All the points and contentions of both the sides are kept open. 8. In view of the disposal of the appeal, nothing survives for consideration in C.A. No. 744 of 2011 and same is disposed of accordingly. (Ranjit More, J.)