1 SNS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.708 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.956 OF 2011 Aijaz @ Azaz Mohammed Shaikh ...Appellant. v. M.C.G.M. ...Respondents. Mr. Anil C. Singh i/by Dilip H. Shukla , advs. For the Appellant. Ms K.K.Soran, adv. For the Respondent/BMC. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : JULY 15, 2011. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2 Appeal is preferred by the plaintiff against the refusal of ad- interim relief pending the notice of motion taken out to restrain the defendant/respondent from enforcing the notice under section 351 for demolition of W.C.Block on 3rd floor of the building. The learned counsel for the appellant points out from the letter dated 2.1.2010 from the Executive Engineer M.B.R & R Board, Mumbai to show that as per the structural repairs plan of 1984, a toilet block was shown on the third floor of the building as per the available record in that office. Respondent has not filed any reply before the trial Court. In view of the above facts, appeal and the application may be disposed off with the 2 following directions: Plaintiff/appellant shall implead the M.B.R. & R Board as defendant within two weeks. Respondent/defendant shall file reply to the notice of motion within four weeks after impleading M.B.R. & R Board and the trial Court shall hear and dispose off the notice of motion within eight weeks thereafter. Till the decision of the notice of motion, parties shall maintain status-quo. 3 Appeal and the application stand disposed off. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)