1 IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL APPEAL APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.3 OF 2005 FROM ORDER NO.3 OF 2005 FROM ORDER NO.3 OF 2005 Adil Ahmed Hira Ansari ...Appellant Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Another ...Respondents Mr. S.M.Shukla i/b Diwakar Dwivedi for the Appellant CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA, J. A.S.OKA, J. A.S.OKA, J. DATED: DATED: DATED: JANUARY 18, 2005. JANUARY 18, 2005. JANUARY 18, 2005. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. By this Appeal preferred by the original Plaintiff, the challenge is to the order dated 4th December 2004 passed by the learned Trial Judge. By the impugned Judgment and Order, the learned Trial Judge has declined to grant ad-interim relief. 2. After having heard the Counsel appearing for the Appellant, I am satisfied that no case is made out for grant of ad-interim relief. There is no merit in the Appeal and the same is dismissed. No order as to costs. 3. Hearing of the Notice of Motion, if pending, is expedited. It is obvious that Notice of Motion, if pending, will be decided on its merit without being influenced by the ad-interim order and confirmation thereof by this Court. Judge. Judge. Judge.